this month @ motortrend.com
■ Car of the Year
Ride along with Motor Trend editors as they flog almost
30 vehicles to determine which car deserves to be named
the 2006 Car of the Year. From the Azera to the Zephyr,
check out our online wallpaper galleries and videos.

■ Mobile Electronics Buyer’s Guide

■ Departments
16 The Big Picture
The bottom line.
Angus MacKenzie

20 Trend
News/opinion/gossip/stuff.

32 Your Say

The world of in-car entertainment is undergoing a
revolution, so we’re developing a growing compendium
to review the various entertainment systems and empower
you to make smart purchase decisions. Tune in here to
find out how to get more entertainment from motoring.

40 The Asphalt Jungle

■ Everybody’s Got One

42 Technologue

An opinion, that is! Share yours with fellow community
members in our online bulletin boards. Or check out our
polls and tell us which V-8 Crossover you prefer or
whether you’d rather drive the Cadillac STS or the
Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG.

■ Motor Trend Radio
Each Friday, you can find the list of high-profile guests
for the weekend radio shows on the home page. Then
click into forums to discuss the topics before, during, and
after the shows with other listeners and host Bob Long.

the bottom line
Pinch those pennies too hard,
and something’s gonna break
MASSIVE LOSSES, collapsing market
share, make-or-break deals with the UAW,
tough-guy stockholders, rumors of a
management shakeup: GM’s been hogging the
bad news coming out of Detroit in recent
months. But there’s a quieter disaster going
down in Motown: Ford. The Blue Oval’s in a bad,
bad way. Its share of the U.S. market has
plunged from about 24 percent to just over 18
in just five years—and that’s before sales stalled
in the aftermath of Katrina and the winding
back of the so-called “employee pricing”
incentive programs. And its quality problems
are threatening to spiral out of control: Qualityrelated costs increased by $500 million during
the first nine months of 2005 compared with
the same period the previous year.
Chairman and CEO Bill Ford made the best of
its $248 million loss posted during the third
quarter of 2005 by forecasting that the family
business would finish the full year in the black.
But, even as I write this, Ford’s North American
operations are still losing about $15 million.
Every single day. Analysts estimate the

company has burned through $4 billion in cash
in just over a year. I checked Ford’s stock price
this morning. It was eight bucks, give or take a
few pennies. Back in January 2005, it was over
$14. Something like $12 billion has been wiped
off the value of the company in less than a year.
Bill Ford’s now talking of company-wide
“sacrifices.”There’s been a major shake-up of
senior management, with former Mazda/
Premier Automotive Group/Ford of Europe
chief Mark Fields now installed as vice
president of North American operations. Plant
closures are inevitable. And, of course, there’s a
lot of talk about cutting costs. This time,
though, Ford insiders will admit over a quiet
beer, the beancounters will be hitting bone.
Ford’s financial mavens have always prided
themselves on their ability to save a buck. This,
they’ll tell you, is good business management.
The evidence—Ford’s plunging market share—
suggests consumers don’t agree. There’s a
difference between efficiently managing costs
and doing stuff on the cheap. I’m not convinced
Ford’s beancounters get it. The irony is that the

what we’ve been up to...
A LOT MORE THAN USUAL:
(from left) Up 100 feet
for the spectacular
Car of the Year
contenders’ shot;
Danny King holding up his
bride’s wedding gown (we
were there!); and Matt Stone
upholding retro tradition in
this late-1920s Bugatti.

16 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

company invariably ends up spending a helluva
lot more money fixing problems that could’ve
been avoided had it wisely spent a few extra
bucks in the first place. Take that blowout in
quality costs: If Ford hadn’t been in so much of
a rush to outsource the manufacture of so
many of its parts and hadn’t beat up the suppliers
so hard on price, it might not be staring down
the barrel of a $500 million bill. There’s a lesson
here, Bill. You get what you pay for.
Here’s the other problem with beancounters:
They have a short-term view of the world. From
the outside looking in, you can’t help feeling
Ford’s a company so intently focused on next
quarter’s results that it struggles to think much
more than three years ahead. One small example:
Ferrari went two decades without its drivers
winning a Formula 1 world championship before
Michael Schumacher started his five-year
winning streak in 2000. Ford bailed out of its
Jaguar F1 team after a handful of seasons without a result, moaning about the expense.
Another: Ford execs look enviously at the profit
BMW makes on its cars without apparently
making the connection between the Bavarian
automaker’s unwavering investment in product
development over the past four decades, even in
years when that meant the shareholders had to
make do with a skinny dividend.
So, Bill, here’s the bottom line: Close the plants
your market share can’t sustain, bring the
healthcare costs under control, and tighten the
corporate belt. But don’t hack away at the
product design, engineering, and development
budgets. You’re in the business of making cars
and trucks. And good ones don’t come cheap. ■

(trend)

(trend)
N E WS /O P I N I O N /G O S S I P/ST U F F

Drama in Detroit
GM boss rolls the dice again. This time it’s for keeps
LUTZ
WAGONER

YOU COULD

say Rick Wagoner almost
got away with it. News GM
had lost $1.6 billion for the
third quarter of 2005 (even
though revenues for the
quarter were up 5.2
percent on last year to
$47.2 billion) was almost lost in the excited
chatter surrounding the last-minute deal with
the UAW to reduce health-care costs. But cooler
business heads noted the deal will save GM
only $1 billion a year—roughly two-thirds the
amount it bled in just three months.
Not surprisingly, Detroit is swimming in
rumors that a management shakeup’s in the
works. Wagoner is young enough to preside
over the Renaissance Center corporate
offices for another dozen or so years, but he
won’t have that tenure unless the world’s
largest automaker starts making money
again and unless he can drag it out of junkbond status. Whoever’s in charge, GM is
going to become a very different company.
Here are the converging forces for change:

THE PLAYERS
■ KIRK KERKORIAN: The feared corporate raider now owns nearly 10 percent of
GM stock (and has purchased a significant
share of Volkswagen AG). He’s the largest
individual shareholder and says he wants
two seats on the GM board.
■ JEROME B. YORK: Kerkorian confidant
and CEO of Harwinton Capital. The 66-yearold West Point grad was an effective costcutter at Chrysler, IBM, and Waste
Management (but he also lost lots of cash
buying a computer retailer in the late 1990s).
■ BOB LUTZ: Well into the fourth year of
his three-year stint as the senior car nut at
GM, his work is beginning to emerge. The
future stuff looks good, but six new models
failed to impress us at Car of the Year. Claims
Kerkorian’s purchase of GM stock is proof the
billionaire has confidence in GM’s future.
“Assuming I don’t fly a perfectly good
airplane into the ground, I expect to stick
around for a long time.”
■ ROBERT S. MILLER: Delphi chief exec
who took the GM spinoff, its biggest supplier,
into bankruptcy protection. He seeks

20 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

financial help from GM and 63-percent wage
cuts from the United Auto Workers, which
represent 34,000 Delphi employees. Warns
that GM and Ford bankruptcies could be
next.
■ CARLOS GHOSN: GM and Ford are said
to have tried to lure Le Cost Cutter from
Renault-Nissan, but Ghosn isn’t interested.
“Approaches are not always direct,” he says,
in a nonconfirming confirmation.“I like what
I’m doing and see no need to change.”

THE SITUATION
GM HAS reorganized its design,
engineering, and product development into
a global system. Previously, GM had to lay off
overseas designers at the same time design
chief Ed Welburn was hiring new North
American designers. Twelve design centers
and 11 engineering centers will work on
vehicles for the world, specifically for their
various regions. All designers report to
Welburn. Purchasing is global.
■ SAVINGS: Forty percent on prototype
builds, 20 percent on material costs, 25
percent on overall investment, according to
Lutz. More than $1 billion over the lifetime of
a midsize vehicle.“Ultimately, we won’t
measure success by region, but by global
profit and loss.”
■ PLATFORM RATIONALIZATION:
Under the old system, two cars of the same
architecture, say an Opel and a Chevy, couldn’t
be built in each other’s factory. Now, with the
new midsize architecture, for example, Chevy
Malibus, Pontiac G6s, Saturn Auras, Saab 9-3s
and Opel/Vauxhall Vectras can be built in any
Epsilon factory, even though various models
have different windshield touchdown points.
■ REGIONS: Big trucks and SUVs will be
designed in the U.S., midsize cars in Europe,
and subcompacts in Asia, for example, but
with designers and engineers from around
the world in each studio.“No region will be
forced to turn down a product program due
to budget constraints,” Lutz says. GM North
America now has the budget for “a tiny SUV,”
and “we now have Australian designers
working on North American products.”
■ REAR DRIVE: Lutz promised a rear-drive
concept this year, likely a Pontiac sport
sedan. But GM needs a good, affordable big

American rear-drive platform for Buick and
Chevy as well to compete with Chrysler
300/Dodge Magnum and Charger and a
2009 Challenger.

THE DEADLINES
■ SPRING 2006: All the new GMT900
sport/utilities will be on the market. They
must have a good launch or Kerkorian & Co.
will certainly move.
■ FALL 2006: Launch of several important
new cars and all full-size pickups reflecting
GM’s new design direction, including muchimproved interiors.
■ FALL 2007: New GM-UAW contract due.
Delphi’s Miller has told The New York Times
that, if GM doesn’t win big concessions from
the UAW,“they’re finished.”

THE PROBLEMS
■ COSTS: Late last year, GM pegged its
health insurance and pension/legacy costs at
$2325 for every car and truck it builds.
Wagoner scored a victory when he
persuaded the UAW to give GM concessions
on health-care coverage, but GM’s 2005
losses totaled $3.8 billion for the first three
quarters.
■ KERKORIAN: The billionaire believes
Saab isn’t worth any more investment and
that GM should sell off the Hummer brand.
The remainder of GM Acceptance
Corporation, the automaker’s huge financial
services division, would be sold off (GM
already has sold parts of GMAC).

THE BOTTOM LINE
WE’VE SEEN major restructuring plans at
GM every three or four years, and its market
share continues to slide. For Wagoner, the
big issue isn’t product as much as it is labor
cost, pensions, and health care. But if
market share continues to drop and profits
keep eroding, it’ll offset any UAW
concessions, and guys like Kerkorian and
Miller will take over. They’ll cut Saab and
Hummer loose and perhaps do the same for
one or more of Pontiac, Saturn, Buick, and
GMC. Wagoner has been saying good
product will save the company since the
late 1990s, but he’s now rapidly running out
of time. ■ todd lassa

words motor trend editors

LUTZ
LUTZ

MILLER

GHOSN

KEY VEHICLES

SOLSTICE
Turbo gives needed power.

S3X
Chevyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new SUV for Europe.

COMMODORE

Might become Pontiac G8.

SIERRA

Has to fight big, new Tundra.

AURA

Euro-style reinvents Saturn.

YUKON

GMT900 SUVs must succeed.

MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006

21

(trend)

(trend)
N E WS /O P I N I O N /G O S S I P/ST U F F

Finally, a real glimpse at GT-R
The fastest Nissan ever is coming to America

NISSAN UNVEILED
its GT-R Proto at the Tokyo motor
show, a “concept” that design chief
Shiro Nakamura says is 80 to 90
percent of the 2008 production
model that’ll be launched at the
2007 Tokyo show.
The first concept version of this
global GT-R, codenamed R35,
appeared at the 2001 Tokyo show.
Lack of engineering resources in
the face of Carlos Ghosn’s rapid
turnaround of Nissan stretched its
development to seven years. The
R35 is the first GT-R with its own
sheetmetal, and it’s the first built
to accommodate left-hand-drive
markets, including ours.
Nissan has confirmed that North
America will get the same
powertrain as the rest of the
world, rumored to be a twin-turbo,
450-horse, 3.7-liter V-6 (there was
talk our market only would get a
4.5-liter V-8).
Officially, Nissan brass says it

hasn’t decided whether to sell the
GT-R in Nissan or Infiniti
dealerships in the U.S., but we hear
it’ll be sold through selected
Infiniti dealerships (they have the
experience and facilities to handle
high-priced vehicles), and there’ll
be no Nissan badging on the car
—only GT-R.
■ Single center-front air intake
is for optimal airflow and
connects the R35’s styling with
the 1999 Skyline GT-R’s (R34).
The front of the car is the least
production-like, Nakamura says.
■ Designers used analysis of
airflow around the front fenders
to develop their shape.
■ Body sides are sculpted
toward the rear fenders to
express “the power and dynamic
tension of the car.”
■ C-pillar crease is designed for
optimum aerodynamics.
■ Like previous GT-Rs, the R35
has ring-shaped taillamps.

Audi TT,
take two
Audi ponders a three-model lineup

YOU’RE LOOKING AT

the 2007 Audi TT,
mostly. The next TT will be aluminum-bodied and pick up
many of the design cues of the production-ready Shooting
Brake concept revealed at the Tokyo Show. The question is:
Will the new TT be a wagonlike hatchback like the Shooting
Brake (a British coach-building term for a sport two-door
wagon) or hatchback coupe like the current car? Will there
be a roadster?
The answer, according to insiders, is yes, yes, and yes. The
new TT, codenamed AU354, is due on sale in the third
quarter of 2006. The roadster version will go on sale a year
later and may come with vestigial rear seats. The Shooting
Brake is expected to follow that.
Higher-performance TTS and TTRS models will follow
about 2008, with the TTRS’s turbocharged 3.2-liter V-6
making up to 350 horsepower. Audi is reportedly planning
to double TT volume to about 65,000 buyers worldwide.
Meanwhile, the Tokyo Shooting Brake concept features a
raft of high technology that’ll find its way into production.
Let’s have a look. ■

22 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

Talking points
■ Dimensions: At 164.6 inches overall, the Shooting Brake is nearly half a foot
longer than the current TT coupe. It’s slightly narrower (72.4 inches) and
barely taller, at 53.1 inches.
■ Hood: The 250-horsepower, 3.2-liter V-6 carries on and is the Shooting
Brake concept’s engine. In the next TT, the 200-horse FSI turbo four replaces
the old 225-horse 1.8T. Again, the next TT will share the A3/VW Golf platform.
■ Nose: Hope you like Audi’s signature single-frame radiator grille by now
because the TT gets it next, though happy to say without the giant vertical bars.
■ Headlamps: LED low beams are described as an open pinecone; high
beams are blossom-shaped.
■ Under nose: An aluminum diffuser guides airflow
beneath the car.
■ Under car: MacPherson struts up front,
multilink rear. Magneto-rheological
fluid in the dampers applies
voltage (like GM’s system) to
adjust the suspension between
sport and ride-comfort modes.
■ At dash-to-axle point:
Steering is electromechanical
with speed-dependent power
assist.
■ Wheels: The 19-inch doublespoke wheels are from Audi’s quattro
tuner company and are similar to the
RS4’s.

(trend)
N E WS /O P I N I O N /G O S S I P/ST U F F

TOKYO’S COOLEST PRESS KIT
TO EDUCATE the rest of the world about the GT-R’s long and illustrious
heritage (the badge was first added to a high-performance six-cylinder Nissan
Skyline back in 1969), Nissan PR chief Simon Sproule commissioned a bespoke
manga comic about the car. Printed in English and Japanese—and reading
from back to front, just like the real thing—the GT-R manga tells the story of
the GT-R from its beginnings with the Prince Motor Company (taken over by
Nissan in 1966) right through to the reveal of the GT-R Proto. Nissan chief
Carlos Ghosn, already a bona-fide manga star (in 2002, his life story appeared
in a six-part serialization in Big Comic
Superior, which sells 500,000 copies an
issue), makes a couple of appearances. ■

■ Rear side: Note wide C-pillar, prominent rear end.
■ Tail: Horizontal rear lights wrap around to the sides and are designed to
accent the horizontal divide along the car’s tail. The hatch lid extends well
into the roof for a wider, taller opening. Dual exhaust pipes are large.
■ Taillamps: LEDs cast light onto the reflector, distribute it back to the
rear through a double-cloverleaf-shaped mask for an unmistakable
appearance.
■ Interior: Low seat
position, high
center console,
short shift
lever.

●

MT CONFIDENTIAL ●
MIKE CONNOR

MARK FIELDS VERSUS PHIL MARTENS: No
contest. Just as I pondered whether the Glasshouse was
big enough for these two healthy egos came the news
that Martens had “left” the Blue Oval for a top job at
Plastech Engineering. Hmm. Leaving a glamorous, highprofile role at an automaker for work at a supplier.
Doesn’t sound like a career move of choice, although
Bob Lutz did bounce back from Exide to land at
GM…The smart money has long said Fields is Ford’s
next CEO. But does he really have what it takes? Like a lot
of Ford fast trackers, he’s moved up the ladder before
results at his last job were known. Most recently Ford of
Europe/Premier Automotive Group chief, he can claim a
31.9-percent jump in U.S. sales for Land Rover for the
first 10 months of 2005 (thanks to the all-new LR3). But
Jaguar sales are down 31.7 percent, Volvo is off 6.4
percent, and PAG is still losing money…Speaking of guys
known for self-promotion, Peter Butterfield was fired as
Kia North America’s chief at a dealer meeting. His bosses
called him into another room, gave him notice, and then
escorted him from the building, reports say, as his
replacement got up from the audience and took over.
His replacement? Len Hunt, demoted Volkswagen of
America chief…How Detroit works: Division X meets its
cost targets but misses its revenue targets. Division Y
blows its cost targets but makes up for it by better
revenues; in other words, selling more vehicles at a
higher profit. So who gets its butt kicked? Division Y, of
course…How Detroit thinks: One Motown analyst has
claimed GM’s decision to sell its 20-percent stake in
Subaru parent company Fuji Heavy Industries was driven
by Subaru’s intransigence over its trademark boxer
engines, which prevented platform sharing. He slammed
Fuji’s conviction that the boxer engines are an integral
part of Subaru’s brand character, saying few U.S. Subaru
buyers know or care what’s under the hood of their cars.
Just like all those Oldsmobile buyers who didn’t know or
care when GM fitted their cars with Chevy engines…
■ Got gossip? E-mail mike.connor@motortrend.com

Traffic jam
NOW YOU can drive Motor Trend’s 2005 Car of the Year
right in your living room. Mattel’s Tyco R/C Chrysler 300C
one-sixth-scale model ($99), part of the maker’s new
Dropstars line, features radio-controlled steering and
motion (up to 65-foot range), pulsating lights and
glowing LED spinners, and built-in three-inch speakers
with a connector for your MP3 player. Buy one for your
kid, then hide it in your office. Available at Target,
Wal-Mart, and most major toy stores. www.tycorc.com. ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006

23

(trend)

NUMBER

N E WS /O P I N I O N /G O S S I P/ST U F F

CRUNCHING

66

BUGATTI EB112 CONCEPT, 1993

Veyron, the sequel
Bugatti now plans $1 million, 950-horsepower sedan
BUGATTI’S NEXT model
will be a million-dollar sedan. Having
relaunched the brand with the Veyron, a
car that’ll never make money, Bugatti’s
plan is to defray the immense cost of
developing the W-16 engine, sevenspeed DSG transmission, and all-wheeldrive system by reusing them in a frontengine platform.
Bugatti chairman Thomas Bscher says
the new car will use a structure of
mixed materials—aluminum and
carbon composites. The Veyron has
steel end frames, a carbon tub, and
part-aluminum skin. Once Bugatti
designs a new platform, it can spawn

sedan, coupe, and convertible bodies.
The aerodynamics will be much
easier to arrange because top speed will
be limited. The turbos will be smaller for
better engine response, reducing horsepower to about 950. To meet LEV2
requirements, the engine will switch to

direct gasoline injection. Although some
of the engineering can be scaled back
because the top speed will be lower, it’s
unlikely the new car can be any lighter
than the Veyron because of additional
wheelbase and luxury equipment.
By maintaining its price and
performance points well above the level
of Rolls-Royce, Maybach, and, more
important, sister VW Group company
Bentley, it’s possible to find a market,
Bscher insists. Bugatti’s previous owner,
Romano Artioli, also planned a sedan.
But the Giugiaro-designed EB112 of
1993 (above) never got beyond the
concept stage. ■ paul horrell

GORDON MURRAY ON THE VEYRON
McLaren F1 designer drives the supercar to end all supercars

26 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

■ “But what’s the Veyron for? It feels so big, wide, and
intimidating to drive in the mountains, and vision is poor.
The secondary ride harshness and noise are terrible. It has
a tiny trunk and no room for the stuff you need to carry
with you in the cabin. So it’s not a real-world supercar.”
■ “The real disappointment is it doesn’t feel that quick in
a normal road situation. Oh, once you’re going there’s
loads of torque then power and the acceleration that goes
with it, but there’s turbo lag and far too much rotating
mass. But they’ve done some amazing things with it. On
the track, the chuckability, steering, and braking shine.”
■ “Bugatti says it’s not a track car but a road car. But I
enjoyed it more on the track than in the mountains. If I had
one, that’s all I’d do with it—take mates to the track and
give them rides, show them what
1001 horsepower feels like when the
turbos get going—and what the
brakes are like. It’s brilliant at that.”
* Read Matt Stone’s Veyron story Page 90.

“

“

■ “My heart goes out to the Bugatti
engineers in a way I wouldn’t have
understood at all if we hadn’t done
the SLR. With the McLaren F1, I set
targets, and we saw them through.
Starting with the weight and weight distribution,
package, and the aerodynamics.”
■ “The SLR, like the Veyron, was done the wrong way
around. The styling was done as a show car, and then they
said to us,‘Make that.’ With the Bugatti, they had two
other arbitrary figures to meet, 1001 horsepower and 400
kph. So it needed 10 times as many engineers finding
solutions to problems they should never have had if
they’d started from the right point. And it’s not a bad car.”
■ “In aerodynamics, it’s no further ahead of the F1. In
body structure, it’s behind the F1 and the SLR in that it’s a
hybrid construction where they’re all carbon. But the
engine and transmission are excellent. And the ESP
system lets you get on with chucking the car about.”

EPA HIGHWAY
MPG RATING OF
THE 2006 HONDA
INSIGHT HYBRID,
MAKING IT
THE MOST
FUEL-EFFICIENT
AUTOMOBILE
CURRENTLY SOLD
IN AMERICA.

725
MILLION
ESTIMATED
AMOUNT IN
DOLLARS THAT
GM RECEIVED
FOR SELLING ITS
20-PERCENT
STAKE IN FUJI
HEAVY
INDUSTRIES,
PARENT COMPANY
OF SUBARU.
TOYOTA WILL BUY
SOME OF THE
SHARES TO TAKE
AN 8.7-PERCENT
INTEREST IN FUJI.

550
LAST-MINUTE
NAME CHANGE
(TO S550) OF THE
FIRST 2007
MERCEDES-BENZ
S-CLASS MODEL
SET TO REACH
OUR SHORES IN
FEBRUARY. AT
THE TIME OF OUR
PREVIEW DRIVE
(MT, DECEMBER
2005), THE
COMPANY HAD
EXPECTED TO
CALL THE
5.5-LITER V-8POWERED CAR
THE S500.

(trend)

(trend)
N E WS /O P I N I O N /G O S S I P/ST U F F

(✱spycam✱)

SAAB, meet Saturn
GM sell-off of Fuji forces 9-6x rethink
SAAB’S 9-7x sport/utility has a new
lease on life, but not because it captures the
Swedish automaker’s character so well. The
Saab 9-6x (the 9-7x’s would-be replacement),
based on the Subaru B9 Tribeca and, until now

BOTTOM LINE: The 9-7x is to be Saab’s
sole SUV for several years to come. ■

(✱spycam✱)

TOYOTA CHIEFS
ordered a last-minute
redesign of the next-generation
Corolla after seeing Honda’s
avant-garde Civic at the
Geneva show earlier this year.
Insiders say senior execs were
worried the new Corolla, said
to resemble a scaled-up Yaris,
would be seen as far too
conservative.
The redesign reportedly has
pushed back the launch of
the tenth-generation Corolla
by at least six months. But it
underscores Toyota’s resolve
to shake off its reputation for
building bland cars.
Toyota executive vice
president Kazuo Okamoto
concedes some of Toyota’s
products, including Lexus,
haven’t had the desired
impact on consumers
because of the way these cars
look.“I think our design
could’ve been weak,” he said
in Tokyo recently.“We didn’t
have enough aggression in
our design.” ■

scheduled for early 2007, is dead because
General Motors has sold its 20-percent equity
stake in Fuji Heavy Industries.
GM ended its “strategic alliance” with
Subaru’s parent company to “refocus its efforts

and resources” with its other Asian partners,
Daewoo, Suzuki, and Isuzu. Translation: Building
the Saab 9-6x with the Subie’s horizontally
opposed six doesn’t fit in with GM’s new global
manufacturing rationalization. So the 9-6x is
out, at least until GM can find another donor
platform for the long-awaited Saab crossover.
Saab gave MT hell for describing the 9-6x as
“Tribeca-based”—Saab said it was as responsible
for the crossover’s development as Subaru.
Curious, then, that Saab didn’t have enough
ownership in the vehicle to continue
development, the way Chrysler’s next Sebring
will be built on a platform shared with
Mitsubishi. Meanwhile, the Subaru
Impreza/WRX-based, Japanese-built Saab 9-2x
lives on probably through the 2008 model year.
Saab says it still needs and wants a sevenpassenger crossover SUV, and the likely
candidate would be GM’s Lambda platform. It
launches this fall with the 2007 Saturn Outlook,
one of the models designed to make that
division a bigger premium import-fighter. Bob
Lutz already has crowed about how different
the Outlook is from versions from Buick and
GMC, and so a Saab Lambda 9-6x would require
distinctive characteristics and sheetmetal.

BMW’s next
segment busters
FROM THE AUTOMAKER that gave us the sport/activity vehicle
comes a minivan we aren’t supposed to call minivan. It’s known internally at BMW as
LSC or Luxury Space Cruiser. It features elements of touring, SUV, and van genes, says
Michael Ganal, BMW Group marketing chief. The van element is least significant, he
claims—it’s not an appropriate vehicle type for BMW.
The LSC will be based on the 5 Series platform because it’s built in Europe. (This
differentiates it from BMW’s other new model line, the coupe SUV, which will be built
in South Carolina on the Mk2 X5 platform.) It’ll be smaller and lighter than a
Mercedes-Benz R-Class or Audi Q7, which are SUV-based. BMW will save weight
partly from compactness and partly from use of aluminum in the body and
suspension. And it’ll be more carlike to drive than a Q7 or R-Class, Ganal insists.
It’ll be a two-box body, with six- or seven-seat three-row interiors offered. Despite
the name, ultimate space isn’t the chief priority. Ganal cites what happened when
Mercedes and BMW both decided to make a car smaller than the 3 Series/C-Class
size. Mercedes went for space, with the front-drive one-box A-Class, whereas BMW’s
1 Series is—apart from the hatchback—a traditional rear-drive BMW, leading to a
sacrifice of space. The same will happen when BMW builds its LSC—space and
versatility will be better than in a 5 Series, but driving characteristics and style won’t
be sacrificed as much as they have been with the R-Class.
Standard 5 Series engines and transmissions will power the LSC. That means the
new magnesium-blocked Valvetronic six-cylinder engine goes up to 3.0 liters and
Valvetronic V-8 up to 4.8 liters. Later in the model cycle, BMW will introduce directinjection gas engines. But there’ll be no M version: BMW insists its M tag is applied

we
we hear
Chrysler has confirmed it’ll build the Dodge Nitro as a
production sport/utility. Dodge launched the Nitro last
year at the New York show. With a longer rear overhang
and four inches added to the wheelbase of the Jeep
Liberty on which it’s based, Dodge is calling the SUV
midsize. It’s on sale this fall as a 2007 model.
Bentley won’t build a sport/utility vehicle, according to
company chairman Franz-Josef Paefgen, who says the
decision has been ratified by the VW Group board.
Paefgen admits the idea was carefully considered, but it
now seems certain the Bentley range will be restricted to
the Continental-based models—the GT coupe, Flying
Spur sedan, and the forthcoming GT convertible—and
the Arnage sedan and Azure convertible.
VW itself is said to be working on a bunch of new
models to be launched before the end of the decade. Of
most interest is an all-new two-door coupe said to be
the spiritual successor of the much loved Corrado.
Designed to fit above the new Golf-based Eos
coupe/cabrio, the Corrado successor reportedly will be
built on a modified Golf platform, have all-wheel drive,
and be powered by a 247-horse, 3.2-liter V-6.
Stanford University has won the Defense Advanced
Research Project Agency’s Grand Challenge with a
driverless Volkswagen Touareg nicknamed “Stanley.”
Stanley crossed the Mojave desert circuit more than 11
minutes ahead of the second-place Hummer with a time
of six hours, 53 minutes, and eight seconds. The DARPA
Challenge is designed to advance driver-free technology
for use in combat.
Ford Motor has teamed up with Boeing and
Northwestern University to collaborate on nanotechnology research for products in future cars and airplanes. The technology could help Ford increase power
in hybrid auto batteries by creating more energy from
traditional materials. It also could help develop highercapacity hydrogen storage tanks in cars. ■

only to cars that can make use of the power and suspension upgrades—again making
M an operation different from Mercedes’s application of AMG across the range.
BMW will offer rear-drive or Xdrive all-wheel-drive options on the LSC. Further
chassis options will include self-leveling air suspension and Active Front Steering.
BMW will preview this machine with a show car in late 2006 or early 2007.
The coupe SUV, however, is a different story.“It’s a 4x4 with coupe styling, but a
high driving position, produced in the U.S. So you can imagine what that could be,”
says R&D chief Burkhard Goeschel.“It should behave as it looks.”
BMW also is working on a new range of engines, using direct gasoline injection
(known as High Precision Injection and exhibited on the X3 Efficient Dynamics show
car at Frankfurt) and turbocharging. The HPI concept, where fuel is guided into the
cylinder by the jet itself, allows the engine to run lean at all operating ranges, not just
light load, so is claimed to offer fuel savings of about 10 percent. It’ll be introduced
first in Europe where low-sulfur fuel is widely available.
But combining with turbos at a later stage, BMW will downsize the cylinder
capacity and increase compression ratio for improved fuel efficiency. Goeschel says
these engines have no turbo lag, can produce 150 pound-feet of torque per liter
displacement, and have fuel efficiencies to match diesels. ■ paul horrell

Quality time
THE ALPINE RALLYE Swiss
watch ($375) from Wenger (maker
of the Swiss Army knife) not
only commemorates the 49th
running of the Rallye des
Alpes—one of Europe’s oldest
auto rallies—it also looks
damn cool. The watch includes
a blue face, vented leather
strap, and a Swiss chronograph
movement that’s water-resistant to
330 feet. Just 1000 pieces of this
limited-edition timepiece are
available; www.wengerna.com. ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 29

FEBRUARY IN
DAYTONA BEACH

ONLY MEANS

(your say)

(your say)

speech therapy

letter
of the
month

ONE THING
back to the future

JACK
IS BACK!
Win a trip to Daytona Beach
and the Jack Daniel’s Racing
Kickoff Party.

Visit
www.jack-is-back.com
to enter.

You can always depend on the engineers
at Lexus to approach competitive car
design as if they’re solving a math
equation. Could it be that on some
corporate level they’ve made the mistake
of thinking that “fun to drive” isn’t a
question of human involvement with the
car but only of achieving certain
performance benchmarks? Imagine 30
years in the future, the Lexus IS 650—with
its solar-powered, fuel-cell, cold-fusion
hybrid engine—is capable of 0-to-60 in 1.5
seconds with an electronically limited top
speed of 305 mph, while the primary
passenger plots a course to his destination
safe in his sensory isolation chamber. Back
in 2006, with the IS 350, Lexus created the
perfect sport sedan for the digital-age
consumer who loves performance but not
necessarily driving. I count myself as one
of the many enthusiasts disappointed that
Lexus can no longer build a car just for us.
John Wooldridge
Cabot, Arizona

write us at
6420 Wilshire Blvd.,
Los Angeles, CA 90048

e-mail us from
motortrend.com

■ letter of the month wins!
John wins a bunch of cool stuff—a spotlight jumpstarter, power inverter, surge
strip; shoplight, adapter—courtesy of
this magazine. Now you can really keep
Motor Trend in the trunk of your car.

Angus MacKenzie writes (“The Big Picture,”
October) that we need a “Man on the Moon”
speech to solve our dependency on foreign oil.
That already happened over 25 years ago when
President Carter said the energy crisis was the
moral equivalent of war. Since then, billions of
taxpayer dollars and even more private
investment money have been spent. The result:
We use more oil now than ever.The fundamental
problem is that, as long as gasoline is relatively
affordable, any technology that increases
efficiency will be used to improve performance,
not fuel consumption. Witness the current
horsepower wars, the boom in SUVs, and the
fact that Chrysler/Jeep soon will offer a Hemi
engine in virtually everything it sells. This isn’t a
technological problem; it’s an economic and
political one. Gas-guzzler taxes on new cars are
tempting but do nothing relative to the
millions of cars currently on the road or how
many miles they’re driven. Until the price of
gasoline is significantly increased through
taxes, there’ll be no incentive for anyone to use
less gas in the cars they have right now, use public
transportation more, or buy cars that get better
gas mileage in the future.
Robert du Mont
Goose Creek, South Carolina
We can choose our destiny by charting the
future with a vision, or we can be reactionary. In
today’s world, the visionaries survive and the
reactionaries fade away. Thanks for being a
visionary.
Christian Belady
Richardson, Texas

bite the bullet
“Bullitt,” the number-one car-chase movie
(“Trends”)? Maybe number two. The best car
chase (and I can’t believe you guys didn’t list it)
is Roy Scheider’s in “Seven-Ups”—actually, the
bad guy Roy was chasing was also in the
“Bullitt” chase. But the chase through New York
beats Steve McQueen’s by a mile.
Johnny S.
Brooklyn, New York
Those weren’t necessarily our choices for the best car
chases.We were simply reporting on a recent online
pole.We agree with you, though.The car chase in
“Seven-Ups” should be at the top of the list.—Ed.

I just about passed out from laughing so hard
when I read the following sentence (“Trends”):
“Dieter Zetsche deserves credit for a Carlos
Ghosn-like turnaround of Chrysler’s fortunes.”
What’s so funny about that sentence? Four days
before Motor Trend hit my mailbox, the Harbour
Group released a report stating that, for the first
six months of the year, Chrysler had earned an
average profit of a paltry $186 per vehicle. After
seven years, a reduction of around 40,000 jobs,

(your say)
and literally billions invested into the business, all
it has to show for it is an average profit of $186
per vehicle? By any rational business standard,
that’s a failure. In the same Harbour Group report,
Nissan, of which Ghosn orchestrated the turnaround, is reported to be earning, on average,
$1826 per vehicle.Two companies in the
dumper, both being bought into simultaneously,
but one making 10 times the profit per vehicle
of the other at the end of the same period.
Carlos Ghosn delivered the goods. Dieter
Zetsche delivered smoke and mirrors. I won’t
even go into the amusing irony of the Grinch
statement made later in that article.You’ve been
punked by the DCX propaganda machine.
Ted Slezak
Owatonna, Minnesota

danse macabre
If all these cars of the future were that smart,
isn’t there the possibility that one out of every
100 driveways could have Christine straight
from Steven King’s novel parked in it (“Asphalt
Jungle”)? Cars with that much technology
could turn into the next big brother and be

watching our daily lives. The idea of my Jetta
refusing to drive me to the movies because it
knows I have paperwork to file is frightening.
Imagine if cars were given not only super computers but emotions as well? I’ll pity the driver
of a Corvette as he sees a pack of jealous “little
brother” Aveos coming lightning quick on his
tail to run him off the road.
Chris Shrader
York, Pennsylvania

she’s all that
When Corvette first came out with exposed
headlights, I was nervous (“Red Roar”). But on
this new Vette, they look wonderful. It’s now my
dream to own and drive a 2006 500-horsepower-plus Corvette. I can picture myself flying
down the road, throttle wide open, radio and
air-conditioning cranked up, having the time of
my life. Sad that it’ll probably take me a long
time to afford the Vette—it’ll probably take an
even longer time for me to drive legally, after
all, I just turned 14. Maybe, if I’m lucky, I can persuade my parents to get me a fake I.D. and
$80,000. Anyway, now that you wrote this arti-

cle, I can show my so-called car-expert friends
that their 1990 Civic with NOS and a carbonfiber hood is all that. Finally, an American
musclecar that can pump out high horses and
look sweet at the same time.
Nathan Kinneberg
McVille, North Dakota
As I was scanning the specs, I stopped on the
entry: three valves/cylinder. Is this a misprint or
has GM produced a version of its developmental
three-valve head? Although the text and sidebar talked about the valvetrain, there was no
mention of a three-valve head other than it
resembled the race head. Has the “race”
Corvette been using three-valve heads?
Max E. Lantz
Meadowlakes, Texas
Our goof. It’s still just two big valves per
cylinder.—Ed.

corporate raider
Argh! Is Ford, excuse me, Jaguar raiding the
corporate parts bin too much (“Mirror Image”)?
The Jaguar XK’s front looks like that of a Ford
Taurus, the back looks like a Mazda RX8’s, the
mirrors are off a 1999 Cougar, the door handles
and side gill must be from Land Rover, and the
roofline is an overgrown Ford ZX2’s. Having
owned a sultry Jaguar XJS, I can honestly say
this car doesn’t make me want to run out and
purchase one. It was bad enough when Jaguar
started selling the tarted-up Lincoln LS and calling
it the S-Type. We’re still living through the
failing X-Type based on the Ford Contour. But
to do this to the beautiful XK8 series is a crime.
Mike Saporetti
Hanford, California

all-american beef
I’ve been selling VWs now for about three years
and have always felt the Passat was a great
car—and the new model is no exception (“Due
Respect”). The article says there are 2.7 million
midsize-sedan buyers, but only 75,000 are
opting for Passats. I don’t see this number
improving much in the coming years unless VW
wakes up to smell what American buyers want
in a car. I can’t count the number of customers
who’ve looked at the Passat and bought something else simply over power seats. VW needs to
realize that Americans are lazy, and those kinds
of features are now expected in cars in this
segment.
Damian Sherrick
Overland Park, Kansas

which way to the front?
We’ve asked for a powerful V-8 engine, and we
got a 303-horse V-8 (“Begging for Attention”).
We’ve pleaded for more sophisticated styling,
and Chevy redesigned the Impala inside/out,
top to bottom. So who cares if all the horsepower is headed to the front wheels instead of
the back? Chevy has clearly made a faster,
36 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

all-american beef
sexier, and more luxurious Impala, so get over
the fact that it’s front drive already. Why is rear
drive so important to buyers in the first place?
It’s not like all these old farts with 300Cs and
Chargers are doing donuts and burnouts in
empty parking lots anyway.
Mike Johnson
Marietta, Georgia
It’s not the donuts we relish, it’s the fact that powering the rears frees the front tires to do what they
do best—bend the car into a corner.—Ed.

quick change
Good to see that Motor Trend remembered the
heart-stopping Zonda (“New Car Buyer’s
Guide”). However, a couple of cars also deserve
mention: the Morgan Roadster V-6, a limitededition Plus 8 variant with a newer powerplant
for $75,000-ish, and the Koenigsegg CCR, which
is almost as quick as a Veyron—and it’s a better
bet because it’s already in production (unlike
Bugatti’s repeated delays) and homologated for
U.S. sale (due to arrive by the end of the year).
800 horsepower for half the Veyron’s price, and
a removable roof? I know which one I’d buy if
my sofa held enough change.
Jason Klinger
Grand Haven, Michigan

horseplay
Why did you leave out the Audi A8L W12
(“Thoroughbreds”)? It has all of the comfort and
interior class of the Bentley and the smoothest
power of any that you reported upon. It’s the
thoroughbred of this class, even though limited
to 150 units at the current time.
Richard Glassman
Memphis, Tennessee
Is Audi also splicing out the rear doors on those
150 W12s? This was a coupes-only race.—Ed. ■
All correspondence must include an address and a

You listed the Mazda Miata as a front-drive car.
You also noted the Miata shares its platform
with the RX8. But this contradicts what was said
in the September 2005 issue where the 2006
MX5 was the cover car. On page 46 of that
September issue you state:“The new MX5
shares no major parts with the rotary-powered
RX8.”Which is correct?
Jeremy May
Laughlin AFB, Texas
Mea culpa on the front-drive bit, and you’re right
that barely anything is shared, except enough
common points to allow the cars to be assembled
on the same line.—Ed.

daytime telephone number. Any material accepted is
subject to such revision as is necessary at our sole
discretion to meet the requirements of this publication.
All materials sent to the editors become property of
Motor Trend magazine and cannot be returned.
Unsolicited materials will not be accepted and will not
be returned. This magazine assumes no responsibility
for loss or damage thereto. The act of mailing a
manuscript and/or material shall constitute an express
warranty by the contributor that it is original and in no
way an infringement upon the rights of others. Due to
the volume of mail received, we can reply only to
letters selected for publication.

(the asphalt jungle) arthur st. antoine

flash jeff gordon
These racers will be driving rockets.
Might you be one of them?
■ photograph lionel deluy

LIKE OUT-OF-CONTROL NASCAR
machines, they’ll fly off the asphalt and pirouette
into the sky—except it’ll be intentional. At full
speed, they’ll leave Indy cars in the dust. Like
Formula 1 racers, they’ll battle for the checkered
flag on tracks kinked like your lower intestines.
Although the tracks will be in 3-D. And invisible.
Welcome to the Rocket Racing League
(www.rocketracingleague.com), the brainchild
of X Prize founder Peter Diamandis. If
Diamandis and league co-founder Granger
Whitelaw—a venture capitalist and two-time
Indy 500-winning team partner—succeed in
bringing their vision to life, in 2007 we’ll be
watching futuristic, rocket-powered “X-Racers”
duking it out in the skies like Alonso and
Raikkonen after drinking way too much Tang.
Diamandis isn’t some starry-eyed dreamer in a

40 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

“Yoda Rules”T-shirt. His résumé includes
undergraduate and graduate degrees in
aerospace engineering from MIT and an M.D.
from Harvard Medical School. One of his first
companies, Space Adventures, helped get private
citizens Dennis Tito and Mark Shuttleworth to the
International Space Station.
I met Diamandis briefly at the 2004 Reno Air
Races, where he was taking journalists up in a
modified Boeing 727-200 cargo aircraft to
showcase his newly launched Zero Gravity
Corporation (www.nogravity.com), which offers
the public “weightless” parabolic flights that
mimic the astronaut-training flights of NASA’s
famed KC-135 “Vomit Comet.” Diamandis
impressed me then with his vision, seemingly
limitless energy, and hands-on style.
A month later, he handed SpaceShipOne

designer Burt Rutan a $10 million check for
winning the Ansari X Prize, which Diamandis
had set up to recognize the world’s first private
spacecraft to successfully complete two
consecutive flights to the edge of space.
And now comes the RRL. The X-Racers—
expected to cost about $1 million each—will
initially be based on the XCOR Aerospace EZRocket, a modified Long-EZ aircraft (also
designed by Burt Rutan). Power will come from
liquid-oxygen and kerosene motors developing
about 1800 pounds of thrust, enough for top
speeds in the 250-mph range. Though races are
expected to last for an hour, the X-Racers will
carry fuel for only four minutes of powered
flight—meaning pilots will need to switch the
rockets on and off, gliding over part of the
course, firing up to overtake a competitor, and
even landing to refuel before rejoining the fray.
The pilots will use differential GPS technology
to follow individualized airborne “tracks” that
viewers will be able to see on TV. A recipe for
spectacular racing action? For sure. A ridiculous,
sci-fi pipe dream? Based on Diamandis’s track
record, don’t bet on it. Indeed, an RRL exhibition
race is scheduled for October 2006.
Diamandis has a bonus feature that could
give other race-series bosses chills: Using videogame links, RRL viewers will be able to fly their
own “virtual” X-Racers, competing in real-time
against the actual pilots.
You always wanted to be world champion,
didn’t you? ■

COULD THE LIFE form that helped
give us our atmosphere now fuel our cars?
A couple billion years ago, give or take, Earth
had an air pollution problem that would make
L.A., Mexico City, and Beijing seem as pristine as
Alpine Switzerland. Then a bunch of
cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) evolved and
started turning carbon dioxide into oxygen.
This lowly slime helped provide the
atmosphere required for intelligent life to
flourish. Today, some of our most intelligent
minds are learning how to cajole these humble
algae into powering our cars.
You read that right. Someday you might tank
up on clean biodiesel fuel produced from oils
extracted from one of five exotic algae varieties.
Feed these simple organisms water, sunlight,
and a stream of nasty carbon monoxide and

42 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

carbon dioxide, and they form hydrocarbon
molecules inside their simple multicellular
bodies. The oil accounts for half the organism’s
mass and can be isolated mechanically
(spinning them on a centrifuge) or chemically
(cracking them with hexane). Once isolated,
these algal oils are converted to biodiesel in
much the same way as are the oils from soybeans, rapeseeds, or McDonalds’ deep-fat fryers.
But don’t scrape the green slime out of your
aquarium and run it through the salad spinner
just yet. The five special algae in question are all
naturally occurring, but they’re far from
ubiquitous. They can be isolated and grown
successfully in open ponds, as a government
study in the 1980s determined, but privatesector research conducted since then has found
that the algae are vulnerable to predators and

other environmental factors, so cultivation in
special enclosed ponds or clear vertical tubes
can greatly improve the yield. And the sludge
left over when the oil is extracted can provide
protein for livestock feed or be distilled into
alcohol.“Farming” the algae requires minimal
energy input (no tractors used to plow, fertilize,
spray, and harvest), and the oil yield per plant
mass is hundreds of times better than soy,
rapeseed, or any other biodiesel feedstock.
It may even whiten teeth and lower
cholesterol. So when can we buy it? According
to one of the technology’s principal
cheerleaders, Mark Cardoso, his EcoGenics
company will spend this winter choosing
among the five finalist algae species and then
break ground in the spring on a full-scale
facility to produce biodiesel from algal oils.
EcoGenics has extensive experience developing
and producing other biofuels and marketing
closed-loop biosphere systems for raising
Spirulina algae (a dietary supplement) and
tilapia fish.
Cardoso’s utopian vision imagines a nation
dotted with thousands of small-scale algae
farms and biodiesel refineries. Such
decentralization would eliminate the cost and
ecological effect of transporting fuel and make
us less vulnerable to local catastrophes like the
recent hurricanes. And, according to a 1998
report from the Department of Energy’s
Renewable Energy Lab, algae farms covering
15,000 square miles of land could yield enough
biodiesel to cover all our transportation needs.
That’s less than one percent of the land
currently used for farming and grazing.
Price is, of course, still a big unknown. The
inherent costs of production and refining are
low enough that Cardoso targets a per-gallon
pump price that would undercut all other fuels
by 50¢ or more, but he acknowledges that Big
Oil and Big Agribusiness aren’t entirely likely to
stand quietly by and watch him erode their
market share. So he hopes grassroots support
of eco-friendly fuels and a renewed interest in
weaning ourselves off foreign oil will help
create a political climate in which algal
biodiesel can flourish. The cynic in me bets on
Big Oil to win in the near term, but I take solace
in knowing Microscopic Oil will be waiting for
us when the dinosaur juice dries up. ■

(and things you probably didn’t know about them)
MAZDA MX-5 Has two cupholders per occupant
MERCEDES-BENZ CLS Exhaust outlets total 25.5 square inches
HONDA CIVIC Si’s 8000-rpm redline is highest here
BMW 3 SERIES 330i and 325i are both 3.0-liter
AUDI A3 The only contender with two clutches
INFINITI M Backup cam plots parking trajectory
PONTIAC SOLSTICE A V-8 will fit under the hood
HYUNDAI AZERA Boasts 104 LEDs across its tail
FORD FUSION The name was almost used for Focus
LEXUS IS 350’s 5.3-second 0-to-60-mph time fastest here
MAZDA5 80 percent as big as R-Class, but still seats six
LEXUS GS Most bars (55) of any grille here
MERCURY MILAN A hybrid version is planned
VW JETTA Interior has French (!) stitching
DODGE CHARGER Boasts the best back seat here
HYUNDAI ACCENT An airbag for every $1850 of car
MITSUBISHI ECLIPSE Galant, Endeavor underneath
BUICK LUCERNE All get one Venti-port per cylinder
CHEVROLET IMPALA SS as quick to 60 as Hemi Charger
HYUNDAI SONATA Rated as a large car by the EPA
CHEVROLET COBALT Cheapest here with oil-life monitor
KIA RIO Outbraked Eclipse; outslalomed Audi A3
VW PASSAT Engines now mounted transversely
LINCOLN ZEPHYR The first Mexican-made Lincoln
TOYOTA AVALON Shares platform with next Camry
MERCEDES-BENZ R-CLASS 19.5-square-foot sunroof
CADILLAC DTS No longer the only front-drive Caddy
CHEVROLET HHR Only contender with runningboards

18

22

17
13
12

8
7

3
2

JAPAN, KOREA, EUROPE, THE USA—
NO ALLIANCES WERE FORMED
IN THIS PROLIFIC FOUR-WHEEL BATTLE
TO RULE THE PLANET
★ words angus mackenzie ★ photograph john kiewicz

NeW

★
WORLD

46 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

ORDeR

27

★

28

24
19
25

★

★

20
21
14
15
16

9
10
11

HERE’S

4
5
6

1

a compelling snapshot from
almost two weeks of testing and evaluating the
largest Car of the Year field in Motor Trend
history: The moment we lined up all 28
contenders, we realized Ford had delivered us
one all-new car done three ways—Ford Fusion,
Mercury Milan, Lincoln Zephyr—but Hyundai
had presented us with three completely different
all-new cars—Accent, Sonata, and Azera. And
what’s more, the Koreans were better built. The
world has changed.
It pays to check your preconceptions at the
door at Car of the Year. Driving each and every
new or significantly updated car launched over
the past year back to back over the same
stretches of road and track provides a unique
opportunity to take the pulse of the global auto
industry. This year, this much was clear: The
Korean automakers are moving fast, taking over
the territory their Japanese counterparts once
owned, while the best of the Japanese are now
muscling in on Europe’s premium brands. And
Detroit? When Detroit gets it right, it’s a home
run. But, sad to say, Detroit doesn’t seem to get it
right as often as it should these days. And the
things it got wrong on some of its Car of the Year
contenders this year was truly basic stuff.
Car of the Year 2006 gave us one of the highestquality fields in years, with at least 10 of the 28
contenders in with a real shot at the title. But after
all the driving and testing, all the
discussion and argument, all the thinking and
agonizing, there could be only one winner. ■ ■ ■

MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 47

★★★★★ motor trend

★ words
angus mackenzie

2006 car of the year

★ photographs
john kiewicz/brian vance

IT’S ALL ABOUT

trusting
the process; suspending judgment until
each contender has been carefully
scrutinized, fully performance tested, and
then driven back to back over the same
piece of road. Only then can Car of the Year
be decided.
It’s a tough process—and not just for the
cars: There are a lot of early mornings and
late nights, discussion and argument, and a
coffee and bagels. But, most of all, there’s a
lot of driving. Each judge logged hundreds
of miles over our test loops.
Nearly a week’s worth of track testing
gave judges the baseline data to work with
during their walk-around appraisals and
initial drives. But it was the short but
devilish handling course, devised by roadtest editor Chris Walton, that enabled the
judges to qualitatively explore the dynamics
of each contender.
With its combination of twists and turns,
including braking and rapid acceleration,
the handling course was designed to bring
out the worst in chassis, engines, and
transmissions. Most important here wasn’t
how fast a vehicle went around the course,
but how smooth, quiet, and composed it
felt. It’s here we learned how lumpen the
Pontiac Solstice feels and how chuckable

ENGINEERING EXCELLENCE, design

advancement, utilization of resources, and
safety are the key components of this
criterion. Vehicle concept and execution,
selection and use of materials, packaging,
and dynamics are considered, as are
styling
and
interior
layout,
fuel
consumption, and primary and secondary
safety features.

SIGNIFICANCE
HOW WELL DOES THE VEHICLE do the

job its maker intended it to do? It’s not just
sales numbers that count here: How the
vehicle may impact or change its particular
market segment, influence consumer
perceptions, and transform product
development trends are also taken into
consideration.

THE CRITERIA

VALUE

CAR OF THE YEAR isn’t a comparison
test. With 28 contenders ranging from over
$14,000 to almost $75,000, covering every
niche from two-seat roadster to six-seat
minivan, it’s hard to find common ground
when you simply look at the hardware. So
we don’t. Instead, we evaluate each
contender against three criteria:

EACH VEHICLE IS COMPARED with its

handling course

on-road loop

CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA SPEEDWAY
SPEEDWAY
0.62
0.62 mile
mile

THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA
32.6 miles

100 feet

SUPERIORITY

the Mazda5 is. More than a few judges,
flicking the surprisingly entertaining
Cadillac DTS sideways through a lane
change, fielded calls from OnStar operators
enquiring the nature of the emergency.
Nice to know OnStar works.
The track testing, early drives, walkaround appraisals, and handling course
didn’t quite tell us which would be Car of
the Year, however. What they did reveal was
which cars wouldn’t make it, leaving 10
finalists to face our Thousand Oaks loop,
which packed almost every conceivable
real-world road environment—from tight
and twisty canyon roads to suburban back
streets to lumpy, traffic-choked freeway—
into just 32.6 miles. We spent the best part
of two days pounding around that loop
before we found our worthy winner.Yes, the
process works.

Hard braking
into corner

LY N N B LV D

rivals in its market segment. While a
vehicle with a low sticker price might seem
to have an advantage, it may not be as good
a value as a more expensive vehicle that
offers higher performance and build
quality, along with better functionality, lower
running costs, and higher resale. ■

★ 2006 finalist
ALL PHOTOGRAPHS FOR CAR OF THE YEAR: JOHN KIEWICZ/BRIAN VANCE/EVAN WOLLENBERG

audi a3

TRYING TO

2006
AUDI A3

PROVE
LESS
CAN SOMETIMES
COST MORE

BASE PRICE RANGE
AS-TESTED PRICE
VEHICLE LAYOUT

IS THE

ENGINE

premium-small-car trend
going anywhere? It’s been big in Europe
for years, but $30K hatchbacks still have
limited appeal in the United States.
Wherever the nation’s automotive zeitgeist
is headed, enthusiasts will like the A3. It’s a
tight, light, tossable small car with one of
the best engines in the business, the
2.0-liter FSI turbo four. Thanks to the VW
Group’s innovative six-speed direct-shift
gearbox, you can click off lightning-fast upand downshifts with the F1-style paddles,
or you can let the transmission do the
thinking and waft along with smoothness
and silence that rivals a conventional automatic. Once you’ve used the DSG, you
won’t want any other transmission. The A3
proved a rare find among our sportier Car
of the Year nominees; it’s as much fun on
our short, tight test course as it is on
mountain roads, although the howling, lowgrip all-season Pirelli tires—and the VW
Golf-based chassis—let us down on both
track and road.

The A3’s interior is like those of other
Audis, only smaller and with less glitz.
Expensive-looking materials and tight
instrument panel fit set a benchmark for
the segment. The rotary dials that open and
close the dashboard vents are a nice
reminder of the TT. There’s head- and
legroom for four or for two and plenty of
luggage in back with the rear seats down.
Outside, the tightly drawn sheetmetal and
gaping corporate grille clearly link the
littlest Audi with its larger siblings, right up
to the 6.0-liter W-12-powered A8. Ultimately,
the A3 is part of an emerging downsizing
trend, joining the Honda Civic and Mazda5
in this year’s competition in proving you’re
not driving a rolling Port-A-Potty just
because your car is small. But are the right
style and the right badge enough? ■

that
BMW’s reign as king of the compact-sportsedan hill may not be eternal? The 3 Series
has long provided a fast-moving target for
wannabe competitors, but either this latest
variant didn’t reach far enough out or its
assailants have greatly improved their aim.
Our 12 judges enjoyed throwing the 330i
around our twisty 33-mile road course.
Logbooks gushed with praise for the
neutral handling dynamics and permissive
stability-control nanny. The weighty but
communicative steering drew raves (our
tester had the base, noncomputerized
helm), as did the powerful and reassuring
brakes and supportive front seats that give
a welcome hug. The BMW has a tight,
controlled, almost spring-loaded feel when

driving. There’s nothing lazy about its
steering or suspension. BMW still holds the
high ground in the chassis department with
the peerless way in which it draws
handling raves, while providing a supple,
compliant, and comfortable ride.
But Lexus’s latest IS 350 has the 330i outgunned in the power department, its new
V-6 throbbing out 306 horsepower to the
silky Bavarian straight-six’s 255. While
there’s no stick offered with the big motor
at Lexus, its paddle-shifted six-speed auto
works exceptionally well, and a few testers
dared to criticize the BMW’s stick for
longish throws and a reverse position that
can be confused for first.
Another Bavarian vulnerability is the
interior design, which was seen as one of
the most somber and ordinary of all the
premium-class COTY contenders. There
were ergonomic nits to be picked—from
the stubby electronic turn-signal switch to
the multistep start procedure to the stereo
that’s a threat to anger management—even
in this iDrive-free test car.
Consider all the above in light of 330i
pricing that struggles to undercut $40,000
and can top $50K (expect real-world 325is
to sell for about five grand less), and the 3’s
reign looks decidedly vulnerable. But for
now, long live the 3. ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 51

★ 2006 contender
buick lucerne

YOUR FATHER’S

2006 BUICK
LUCERNE

OLDSMOBILE
IN DISGUISE

BASE PRICE RANGE
AS-TESTED PRICE
VEHICLE LAYOUT

BUICK’S ROLE

in the new
General Motors brandscape is to build
quiet, luxurious, smooth-riding cars of the
sort that Lexus specialized in before it
mounted its current assault on BMW’s
driving machines. The Lucerne, which
replaces the LeSabre and Park Avenue in
Buick stores, attempts to sell LS 430
spaciousness at the price of a loaded ES 330.
The Lucerne and Cadillac’s revamped
DTS share an enlarged and strengthened
platform that dates to the original Olds
Aurora, which was deemed a paragon of
structural rigidity in its day. To quiet the
Lucerne, considerable engineering effort
was invested in eliminating noises at their
source (by revising the accessory drive,
induction box, side mirrors, etc.), keeping
noises out (laminated dash panels and side
glass, wheelhouse liners) and hushing the
sounds that get in (carpet deadeners, largervolume A/C ventilation system). The result
is a cabin built for a librarian.
Lucernes priced to sell to the LeSabre
faithful are powered by a 197-horse,
3.8-liter pushrod V-6 that’s almost as old as
52 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

Buick’s front-fender porthole motif. The
technophile’s choice is the 4.6-liter
Northstar V-8 good for 275 horsepower. As
editor Harwood says, “It gives the car
energy, like a can of Ensure.” Both cars are
backed by a four-speed automatic.
Our V-8 felt spry for a two-ton GM frontwheeler. Driving the Lucerne in an un-Buick-esque manner, we managed to
slide it around our autocross course like a
cop-show stunt driver, trail-braking to
induce mild oversteer. Lucerne intenders
will be sold on the car’s smooth ride,
roomy back seat, and cavernous trunk.
A midlevel CXL model with the optional
V-8 seems a good deal at $26,990, until you
price a Hyundai Azera, which boasts nearly
equal passenger and trunk space, better
performance than the V-8, a classier interior,
better build quality, and a lower price. Ah,
but the Buick faithful don’t shop those
foreign brands, do they? ■

IT WOULD BE easy to dismiss
the new DTS as a New York livery driver’s
dream. But it’s also an update for the car
that led Cadillac’s renaissance six years
ago, when black DTS sedans with darkly
tinted windows were briefly a trend among
well-heeled baby-boomers posing as
characters from “The Sopranos.” Now the
DTS has been left behind as other Cadillac
cars are rear drive again and the trucks are
hip-hop video stars.
But there’s some innovation in the new
DTS. The styling is a solid evolution of
Cadillac’s edgy look, and GM has done
wonders for the interior quality and design,

partly because there was no other
direction to go. Fit and finish are much
improved, with a decent choice of wood
tones and just the right amount of flash. But
here’s much of the elegant new switchgear
in the lesser Buick Lucerne, and even in
new Chevys. While it’s true you’ll recognize
Mercedes switchgear in Chryslers, it’s not
so obvious as to put Benz buyers off. And
while the Chrysler looks like it’s trading up,
the shared pieces in the Cadillac make it
look like it’s trading down.
Dynamically, the DTS is good for a frontdrive Caddy. Its Magnetic Ride Control
adjustable shocks allow decent handling in
the “sport” mode, given how cushy it is in
the other setting. On our short handling
course, the DTS was neutral and more fun
than the smaller Chevy Impala SS. The
Northstar engine always has been a good
performer, with a distinctive, overheadcam V-8 growl. But the car’s electronic
brain doesn’t get along with the suspension’s “sport” setting, at least when driven
the way you’d infer from “sport.” A few
quick corners on the short course set off
the airbag-warning light, which in turn
alerted OnStar Emergency to the
possibility of an accident. The lesson?
Don’t spill the boss’s coffee in the back
seat. ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 53

★ 2006 contender
chevrolet cobalt

AN INJECTION

SHORT
OF THE GOOD
STUFF
AS THE successor to the lackluster,
long-in-the-tooth Cavalier, the Cobalt
didn’t have big shoes to fill. However, that
doesn’t diminish its significance in Chevy’s
lineup. With coupe and sedan body styles
and four trim levels, the Cobalt is Chevy’s
premier small car, the brand’s answer to
such stalwarts as the Ford Focus and the
Honda Civic. For this year’s Car of the Year
competition, Chevy sent us the all-new SS
sedan, which complements the 145-horsepower LS and LT sedans and coupes, the
SS coupe, and the 205-horse SS
Supercharged coupe. The lineup’s sportiest
four-door, the SS sedan is motivated by a
2.4-liter, 171-horse Ecotec four-cylinder—
the same engine used in the Pontiac
Solstice—mated to a five-speed manual, a
combo that produced respectable runs
from 0 to 60 (7.1 seconds) and the quarter
mile (15.6 seconds at 90.0 mph). As its
“SS” badge suggests, the Cobalt gets a
healthy dose of sport—stiffer suspension,
18-inch wheels, and a tasteful ground54 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

effects package. The prescription works.
On the track, the SS displayed a definite
taste for the skidpad (0.83 g), the slalom
(64.1 mph), and the figure-eight course
(27.2 seconds), producing results on par
with those of the Audi A3 and the Lexus GS
430. Track prowess aside, the SS sedan
failed to impress us in several key respects,
notably interior quality and ergonomics.
For a sport compact that commands a nearly
$20 grand price tag, the Cobalt SS’s
plastics were underwhelming to the look
and touch; its back seat was low, flat, and
hard; and its shifter seemed placed too far
rearward. In light of the all-new Honda
Civic, as well as the Hyundai Accent, the
Cobalt ultimately lacked the competitive
sophistication to be a real contender. ■

A SMALL
COOL
CAR
FROM CHEVY
WITH PRICING starting well
below $20,000 and funky retro styling, the
HHR is precisely the sort of small car GM’s
mainstream brand needs. Yes, Chrysler
was here five years ago with the PT
Cruiser, but the HHR’s early sales success
suggests there’s room for more cars with
character at this end of the market. Interior
versatility is the HHR’s strong suit. Rear and
front-passenger seats fold flat to create a
large deck; seats removed, its 63.1 cubic
feet of cargo volume is more than in the
PT’s. But, typically, GM can’t quite keep the

good stuff coming: Seats don’t provide
enough support; interior plastics aren’t as
viable as those in compact Korean and
Japanese cars; window switches aren’t
placed in an intuitive location. And just as
the exterior design is like that of a scaleddown Suburban, the interior is scaled
down, too: The seat cushions are too short
and narrow, the I.P. is undersized, as is the
tachometer in it, and, overall, the cabin
feels cramped.
The optional 172-horsepower four
provides enough juice, and, compared
with an HHR with the four-speed auto, the
manual trans decreased time to 60 mph by
more than a second and increased quartermile trap speed by four mph, though the
five-speed manual transmission feels
rubbery. The Delta platform is capable and
serves the wagon well, and handling and
steering response are decent. The fivespeed will allow you to wind up the HHR
and make it bend to your will, but there’s
more fun to be had in a 230-horsepower
turbocharged PT or the Mazda5 for similar
money. GM has increased HHR sales
projections—a welcome bright spot for the
embattled giant. Sometimes, a goodlooking body, functional interior, and low
price are enough. Now, if GM only sweated
the details more. ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 55

★ 2006 contender
chevrolet impala

ONE-TRICK

PONY

BLINK AND

you’ll miss it:
Chevy’s sort-of-new Impala, available with
a choice of two V-6 engines or the new
SS-specific 5.3-liter, 303-horsepower V-8
with fuel-saving cylinder deactivation, is
almost invisible. With its complete
redesign inside and out, this Chevrolet
won’t offend anybody who finds himself at
the rental-car counter looking for a large
car—but GM should be aiming higher than
lowest-common-denominator transportation.
Whatever happened to the idea of a mainstream Chevy sedan with pizzazz and eyeappeal? It used to build ’em in the 1950s
and 1960s, you know.
The SS is a step in the right direction, but
isn’t a complete answer to cars like the
Charger. While it may deliver the same
0-to-60 time as a rear-drive Dodge
Charger R/T, no one will notice. And it’s a
lead-tipped arrow: Dial in any more than 90
degrees of steering, and you’ll be sliding
out of the unsupportive seat at the same
time the front wheels begin to howl in
protest. There are other cars in the marketplace—not necessarily wearing legendary
performance badges such as SS—that are
56 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

more fun to drive, although this one does
make good noises.
The cabin is either clean or bland,
depending upon your view. It’s curious that
the shifter surround displays no markings
to indicate what gear has been selected;
consult the instrument cluster for that. We
might be falling prey to our too-high
expectations and from our rose-colored
memories of past SS models. Yes, it beats
the pants off the mid-1990s Caprice-based
Impala SS, and it’s better than the previous,
ugly, V-6-only Impala, but that’s not enough
these days. If you think of the 2006 Impala
SS as a car that keeps the old-school 1960s
tradition of implanting a powerful motor in
an otherwise sensible-shoes sedan, you’ll
be pleased. We’d like it with a bit more
soul—and a whole lot more driving
pleasure. ■

ENOUGH
ABOUT THE
FOURALREADY
DOORS,
THE NEW CHARGER
draws inspiration from Dodge’s horsepowerfilled history to join the Chrysler 300 in
redefining the family sedan. The recipe is as
rock-solid as the Mercedes E-Class-derived
LX platform it rides on, with a trio of
powerful engines, independent suspension,
roomy interior, and dramatic styling.
Starting in the mid-$20s, the base model is a
great value with its 3.5-liter, 250-horsepower
SOHC V-6, but our test scrutiny focused on
the bang-for-the-buck enthusiast’s choice,
the R/T. Clearly, the one word you need to
know here is “Hemi.” The brochure-friendly
numbers break down to 5.7 liters and 340
horsepower, but it’s the broad torque curve

and rich exhaust rumble that give the OHV
engine its magic. Enhanced with the MultiDisplacement System, this Hemi is able to
manage its cylinder operation to match load
conditions, from all eight pistons thundering
under full acceleration, to four lazily ticking
over while cruising. The MDS enhances fuel
economy by more than 10 percent, and its
operation is seamless. At the dragstrip, the
Charger races down the quarter mile in a
musclecar-worthy 14.3 seconds, reaching
99.5 mph—impressive performance for a
two-ton family sedan with more interior
volume than a Mercedes-Benz S-Class.
Hustled around our road course, the
Charger’s dynamic acumen impressed; the
rigid, generously tired car was easy to push
and control. Even when off, the ESP system
still provides a measure of safety by
intervening progressively to counter
potentially dangerous motions, albeit at a
greater tolerance threshold. Downsides?
Like the Dodge Magnum, the spacious
Charger interior is a bit too stark. Yes, it’s a
direct sibling to the Chrysler 300 that won
our hearts and Car of the Year award 12
months ago. And, yes, we like it just about as
much. But in COTY terms, the Charger is
simply a well-executed variation on a
winning theme, and in this year’s
competition that wasn’t enough. ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 57

★ 2006 finalist
ford fusion

TAKING AIM AT

2006 FORD
FUSION

ACCORD
AND CAMRY—
AGAIN

BASE PRICE RANGE
AS-TESTED PRICE
VEHICLE LAYOUT

58 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

$25,135 (SEL V-6)
Front engine, FWD,
5-passenger, 4-door sedan

THE MAZDA6’S

platform
was too good to go untouched by the rest
of Ford Motor Company. It’s so good, in
fact, Ford has pinned its future on it in the
form of three sedans: the Ford Fusion,
Mercury Milan, and Lincoln Zephyr. The
Fusion, which slots between the Focus and
the Five Hundred in the Ford lineup, will
impress people who’ve driven only Detroitmade cars over the past 10 years, yet it
leaves something to be desired for those
whose eyes wander toward the Japanese
brands. It enters a price and size category
that includes heavy-hitters like the Accord
and Camry, and, as such, will be instantly
compared with those rivals—as it was
during Car of the Year. What the Ford has
going for it are excellent real-world
handling and quick, tight steering, both of
which feel like they came from a Europeanmarket car and make it quite possibly the
best-handling midsize sedan Ford’s ever
sold in the U.S.
However, to be able to enjoy the drive,

$17,995-$22,360

ENGINE

3.0L/221-hp/205 lb-ft
DOHC 24-valve V-6

several aspects of the car’s personality
have to be ignored and forgiven. There’s its
thrashy, harsh V-6 (the base engine is a
160-horse four), which has a respectable
221 horsepower, but lacks the refinement
of comparable Japanese engines. Backing
that is a six-speed automatic. In Drive, it did
a decent job of holding the right gear, but
the closest this trans gets to a Sport setting
is in Low, where gears are held longer and
downshifts happen more quickly—but the
driver has no other control of gear
selection. Another unfortunate standout is
the cabin, which has cheap materials that
look like the result of cost-cutting. It’s a
parts-bin mish-mash, with the same greenLED stereo display seen in Fords for the
last decade. The interior is functional and
purpose-built, and that’s all. The car is a
big step up for Ford, but it hasn’t quite
reached the top rung. ■

“THEY’RE HEEEEYER.”
We’ve got to hand it to the Koreans; this
year’s trio of Hyundai cars (and one Kia) is
damned impressive. With its rich interior,
standout build quality, and impressive list of
standard equipment, the Accent appears
poised to dominate the entry-level
segment once owned by Japanese
automakers. The 2006 Accent comes in
one moderately equipped trim and body
style, the GLS sedan, starting at a mere
$12,000 with few options. Standard safety
equipment is far from basic and includes
anti-lock brakes, six airbags, front-seatbelt
pretensioners, and load limiters. While an
AM/FM/CD audio system and five-speed
manual are also standard, luxuries like airconditioning, four-speed automatic, and
power windows and locks with keyless
remote cost extra. But not so much that
ordering them will break the budget of a
first-time buyer. Even so, the Accent isn’t a
Golden Calipers winner. As we’ve
witnessed with recent Hyundai products,

this car covers all the bases for thousands
of dollars less than direct competitors, but
is by no means a new benchmark for the
segment. For example, the Accent’s
modest 110-horsepower four-cylinder
engine—though boasting continuously
variable valve timing—and four-speed
automatic conspired to singlehandedly
raise the entire COTY field’s acceleration
average with a leisurely 11.8-second 0-to60-mph time. And the handling, with the
optional 15-inch tires, is entertaining, but
again, it’s not the segment-beater. With its
five-year/60,000-mile basic warranty and
included 24-hour roadside assistance, the
neat, honest, undemanding Accent is one
of those cars we’d recommend to a neighbor
kid looking for a decent set of first wheels.
Ironically, this Hyundai’s biggest rival is its
sibling under the skin, the Kia Rio5, a more
enticing package with even more latent
talent and personality. ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 59

★ 2006 finalist
hyundai azera

IT’S NOT LEXUS

GM
SHOULD
WORRY ABOUT. IT’S
THESE GUYS
THIS NEW Hyundai flagship is so
much better than its predecessor, the
XG350, it can’t even wear the same nameplate. By adding about an inch to that car’s
wheelbase, length, and width and almost
three to its height, the interior offers true
full-size accommodations. A new allaluminum 3.8-liter V-6 replaces the ironblock 3.5, harnessing 265 horses to the
reasonably light Hyundai and pulling it to
60 mph in an impressive 6.5 seconds.
Underneath, the suspension description
reads the same—control arms in front,
multilinks in back—but changes to the
geometry and tuning serve to improve the
ride/handling tradeoff. No longer does
Hyundai’s CEO-mobile float along atop
whipped-cream dampers and marshmallow springs. It’s no BMW, and hard
cornering is answered with loud protests
from the tires, but when driving quickly the
suspension damps the body motions long
before the occupants are tempted to grab
the Dramamine.
60 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

The car isn’t intended as a sport sedan,
but when pressed, it gets the job done and
generates decent figures in the process,
besting its two closest rivals here (the Buick
Lucerne and Toyota Avalon) in braking (122
feet from 60 mph compared with 132 for
both) and slalom (63.6 mph, versus 60.9
and 59.4). Take the badges off, and nobody
would guess this is a Hyundai—not by
looking at it or by driving it, either.
Spare the whip, though, and the Azera
spoils the driver with creature features like
an electric rear sunshade and power tilt
and telescopic steering, pedal adjustment,
and mirrors with memory. The interior
design, execution, and materials look
apropos of a luxury brand, and we guarantee
the faux maple trim will fool all but your
most gimlet-eyed passengers.
The Azera earned points on value,
superiority, and significance, thereby
wounding the Lucerne and Avalon and
earning itself what would’ve been a
podium finish, if we reported runners-up. ■

LOOK
OUT,
TOYOTA. YES,
TOYOTA
WITH A COMPLETE
restyle for 2006 and Toyota in its crosshairs,
Hyundai has brought a faster, betterlooking Sonata to American shores.
Powered by a 3.3-liter V-6 and five-speed
automatic, with six standard airbags and a
ton of standard equipment for its $23,495
as-tested price, the Sonata deserves
attention. Hyundai has gotten aggressive,
providing a car that’s jam-packed with
value and is a decent drive. The smooth
engine produced a good amount of thrust
for the size and weight of the car, but some
felt the transmission was too slow to shift.
Steering response was competitive for the
midsize marketplace, and on twisty,
winding roads, the Sonata proved nimble,
though electronic stability-control intervention came too quickly.
The sedan’s exterior is attractive, if a bit
generic, and makes the Sonata another in a
line of good-looking cars to come from this
company of late. Even though it’s a midsize
car, its interior is huge and spacious
enough that the sedan qualifies as a “large

car,” according to the EPA. Fit and finish is
nearly as good as in midsize cars like the
Camry and Accord, but, unfortunately,
interior design is more ordinary than that of
the exterior. The leather is soft, and
Hyundai paid special attention to the quality
of the stitchwork, but the combination of
questionable plastic quality and a drab,
monotone gray keeps the cabin from
looking as elegant as it could.
It’s clear that with the Sonata, Hyundai set
its sights on the Camry. While this car
meets those goals, the Camry isn’t the
benchmark it used to be, and it doesn’t
incite passion behind the wheel—it
would’ve been terrific to see Hyundai go a
step further. And with the introduction of
Hyundai’s Azera, which is more expensive
but may be a better bargain, the new
Sonata may get lost in the shuffle. ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 61

★ 2006 contender
kia rio

FORGET EVERYTHING

2006 KIA
RIO/RIO5

YOU
KNOW
ABOUT THE
OLD ONE

SOMETIMES, THE

best
surprises come in small packages. Kia’s
recast Rio for 2006 wraps extroverted
styling around straightforward yet efficient
hardware, showing a marked improvement
in packaging and dynamics over the car it
replaces. It’s bigger in nearly every linear
measure, too, save length. Expanded interior
dimensions add up to six more cubic feet
of room, though what the raw figures don’t
tell you is the figures result in a Dr. Who
Tardis-like cabin whose spaciousness
exceeds expectations. The front bucket
seats are comfortable and supportive, and
even the back seat provides ample passenger
space for the class. The dash is well
dressed, with simple, pleasantly arranged
controls in the center stack. Contrasting
materials and touches like dual powerpoints convey a more upscale flavor than
expected—an impression supported by
the tight component fit. The Rio’s diminutive
1.6-liter inline-four provides adequate
performance with the manual transmission,
62 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

though the shifter’s throw is too long and
action too loose. We expect it would be a
more tepid experience with the four-speed
automatic. The DOHC powerplant boasts a
significant gain in fuel economy, well timed
for today’s stratospheric gasoline pricing,
earning a 32/35-mpg EPA rating with the
manual. The Rio5 benefits from available
four-channel ABS, with vented front discs
and rear drums. These binders helped the
Rio5 out-brake the Mitsubishi Eclipse GT
V-6 by a foot. Even more impressive, it
snaked through the slalom quicker than the
Eclipse and the Audi A3. However, the Rio
exhibits a fair amount of body roll, as
experienced on our road course. A soft
suspension exacerbates the motions,
though its tuning should allow the Rio to be
more comfortable on crumbling urban
streets than many of its peers. Doing the
math with six standard airbags, thrifty fuel
economy, and more interior room, the Rio5
adds up to a smart buy. But that doesn’t
make it a COTY-winning package. Yet. ■

(we’ve had one
on our a long-term fleet for the past few
months) has bred forgetfulness: We’d
forgotten how good the M45 really is. One
trip down the dragstrip, one lap of the cone
course, and one mile up the mountain loop,
and suddenly the M45 is, indeed, a
standout COTY player. On paper, it may be
second only to a BMW 545i as the most
competent, most dynamically endowed
midsize luxury sport sedan. Even with our
non-Sport model, it holds corners well with
0.82 g of grip, its powerful V-8 rips through
the quarter mile in just 14.1 seconds, and
ample brakes stop from 60 mph in 118 feet.
In anybody’s book, those are impressive
numbers. We’re also happy to report that
Infiniti has the good sense to allow stability
and traction control to be turned off to
better probe the car’s limits, not those
imposed by an electronic nanny. That’s all
wonderful stuff—but does the M advance
automotive art? Certainly not with its
styling. Some have criticized the exterior

as an overinflated version of the otherwise
crisply styled G35. Others, though
impressed with the Chris Craft-like woodand leather-trimmed interior, felt the
counterintuitive controls soured their
experience. Still, thoughtful amenities like
the best backup camera in the business,
Bluetooth wireless connectivity, XM or
Sirius satellite radio, Bose Studio Surround
audio with 14 speakers, voice recognition,
and a (hyperactive) lane-departure
warning system ensure its place in the luxury market—for a price. Our tester
appeared to have almost every option and
totaled $58,860. A better choice for many
would be the $41,250 3.5-liter, 280-horsepower V-6 M35 that’s also available with allwheel drive. For all these reasons, the
Infiniti M made almost every voter’s short
list, but failed to take the prize. ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 63

★ 2006 contender
lexus gs

YES.
NO.

BMW FIGHTER?
THE LEXUS GS

300/430,
completely redesigned for 2006, is in
pursuit of the BMW 5 Series’s benchmark
balance of sport and luxury, but doesn’t
quite reach it. Our GS 430 had 300 horsepower and a quick, responsive six-speed
sequential-shift automatic, both of which
would suggest sport-sedan entertainment.
Not so. This is a car that feels like it’s not
sure how to properly straddle the sport/
luxury fence. Along with the big power and
quick-shifting transmission, the new Lexus
has a poised chassis and a well-engineered
suspension, yet the car doesn’t allow the
driver to utilize them. Default settings in
place, it doesn’t take all that much to make
the safety systems “correct” enthusiastic
driving. A button allows you to turn off the
traction control, but the system automatically
reengages above 30 to 35 mph. ESP can’t
be turned off at all. The odd effect of the
electronic limiters is to allow the car
to generate impressive performance
numbers, including 6.4 seconds to 60 and a
64 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

64.4-mph slalom speed, without being fun
to drive.
On the luxury side of the equation, the GS
is certainly not lacking. Exterior styling
gives it a much more streamlined, attractive
appearance than its predecessor. Its ride is
pleasantly compliant, without feeling too
Buick-like. The cabin is well isolated from
road noise, materials are soft to the touch,
and the seats are a good compromise
between comfort and support. Also, the
interior contains plenty of high-tech gadgets
to keep a new owner’s digits busy. However,
the strongest evidence that the GS now
leans toward luxury and away from sport is
the engine options: There’s either a
245-horse, 3.0-liter six or the aforementioned V-8. The smaller, lighter IS
comes with a 306-horsepower, 3.5-liter V-6
that trumps even the GS 430’s 300 horses.
Perhaps this is statement enough of what
the GS is—and isn’t—supposed to be. ■

Lexus introduced the
original IS—the 215-horsepower IS 300—
as a Japanese alternative to the BMW 3
Series. While it never beat the BMW head
to head, the first-generation IS was
nonetheless a success for Lexus, establishing
a sporty, compact, rear-drive car for the
brand, which in turn brought younger
customers into the showrooms. Fastforward six years, and Lexus is once again
trying to knock the 3 Series off its pedestal.
Lexus has come equipped with the right
weapons this time around. Case in point:
the 306-horse IS 350, which outguns its
BMW rival, the 330i, by 51 horsepower.
Equipped with a standard six-speed auto-

matic with steering wheel-mounted
paddles (a six-speed manual is available
only on the 204-horse IS 250) the IS 350
ripped from 0 to 60 in 5.3 seconds and
through the quarter mile in 13.9 ticks at
102.5 mph. Those figures place the IS 350
at least a half-second ahead in each
category. Fortunately, the IS has a chassis
capable of reining in all those horses,
evidenced by its 0.86 g on the skidpad and
a 65.0 mph average through the slalom.
While numbers can’t speak for how the car
feels to the driver, the IS 350 did impress
on curvy mountain roads, where it was
deemed quicker than anything else here.
That said, many were less impressed with
the IS’s electronic nannies, which occasionally
intervened uninvited during aggressive
driving, and the overly firm ride that
abruptly relayed every road detail. When
not being driven hard—a difficult feat in
this car—the IS 350 is a posh place to enjoy
the latest and greatest in interior
accoutrements, which include heated/
ventilated seats, a 14-speaker Mark
Levinson DVD-audio setup, and a navigation
system with voice activation, Bluetooth
technology, and a backup camera. The new
IS is maybe the biggest improvement from
a previously existing vehicle. But for Car of
the Year, maybe just isn’t enough. ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 65

★ 2006 contender
lincoln zephyr

HIGH-TECH

2006 LINCOLN
ZEPHYR

CINEMA
ON
WHEELS

BASE PRICE
AS-TESTED PRICE
VEHICLE LAYOUT

ONE OF THE

Blue Oval’s
triplets in this year’s competition, the
luxury-bent Zephyr is intended to cater to
near-luxury shoppers who want the highrent nameplate without having to pay the
premium. Starting at just under $30,000,
the Zephyr is the price leader in the
Lincoln portfolio, yet it’s one of the best
equipped, leaving its Hermosillo, Mexico,
assembly line with a standard 3.0-liter,
221-horse V-6, a six-speed automatic,
17-inch wheels, electronic throttle control,
four-wheel disc brakes with ABS and EBD,
traction control, real-wood interior trim,
electroluminescent gauge lighting, and
front, side, and curtain airbags. Like its
Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan brethren,
the Zephyr is based on a stretched Mazda6
platform and thus boasts more than three
feet of rear-passenger legroom, making
the cabin an ideal place to enjoy the
optional THX II-Certified audio system, an
industry first, according to Lincoln.
Producing audio “worthy of an upscale
cinema,” THX features 10 speakers and

66 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

$29,660
$35,035
Front engine, FWD,
5-passenger, 4-door sedan

ENGINE

3.0L/221-hp/205 lb-ft
DOHC 24-valve V-6

surround sound. Our loaded test vehicle,
which stickered for over 35 large, also
came with heated/ventilated leathertrimmed front seats and a DVD-based
navigation with a 6.5-inch screen. The
Zephyr’s long list of standard equipment
and appealing options are easy to
appreciate, but its price tag is a bit too
steep, especially considering less money
can get you into an Acura TSX, not to
mention the impressive Hyundai Azera
from this year’s field. Perhaps what hurt the
Zephyr’s Car of the Year chances most
were its platformmates. Essentially lessexpensive versions of the Lincoln, both the
Fusion and the Milan were quicker from 0
to 60 and in the quarter mile, not to
mention more fun to drive. ■

THE MAZDA5 may be arriving
late to the six-seater microvan party in
Europe and Japan, but it’s the first one
through the door in North America.
Sometimes being the first to arrive pegs
one as nerdy, and indeed viewed from the
back, the Mazda5 does look a bit
Poindexter. But check out the standard
17-inch footwear and the rakish Mazda
nose, and you’ll get a better sense of what
this wagonette is all about.
Under the skin lurks all the comparisontest-winning hardware that we love in the
Mazda3—the same 2.3-liter DOHC four
(tweaked for a broader torque curve at the
expense of a few peak horsepower and
pound-feet), close-ratio five-speed stick,
and a similarly taut front-strut/multilink rear
suspension. While the 5 is only 3.2 inches
longer than a Mazda3 sedan, raising the
roof by 6.5 inches allows the passengers to
sit up tall enough to make room for a truly
liveable third row of two bucket seats.
All that additional space and hardware
boosts curb weight by about 500 pounds
relative to the Mazda3, but that fatter torque

curve and overall gearing that’s about six
percent shorter help spur the Mazda5 to
60 mph just 0.8 second off the 3’s pace, at
8.5 seconds. Expect the four-speed automatic to add about a second to that time.
On our mountain-road loop, the 5
impressed our editors with its surprising
lack of body roll, high levels of grip, and
amazing neutrality when finessed through
the tightest bends using all the proper
techniques. Of course, we were all driving
solo, and each of us wondered how lively it
would feel full of people and gear or
spinning through the automatic. But the
many clever packaging features, like sliding middle-row seats with under-cushion
storage, sport-sedan handling, and the
promise of 27-mpg highway fuel economy
made us feel like Mazda’s starting a party
that’ll soon be rockin’. ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 67

★ 2006 finalist
mazda mx-5

LET’S STOP

2006 MAZDA
MX-5

CALLING
IT
A
CHICK’S CAR

BASE PRICE RANGE
AS-TESTED PRICE
VEHICLE LAYOUT

WHEN IT COMES time to

ENGINE

introduce a new version of the best-selling
roadster in history, it’s a good idea to
ensure that the fresh iteration is a marked
improvement over its predecessor. In that
regard, Mazda has passed with flying
colors with the third-generation MX-5,
creating a car that’s better in every way
than the one it replaces. For starters, Mazda
has kept the MX-5’s weight to a minimum—
the new car, at 2476 pounds, weighs
roughly the same as the old, turbocharged
Mazdaspeed Miata—yet has significantly
upped the car’s torsional (47 percent
better) and bending (22 percent) rigidity,
producing a stiffer drop-top that exhibits
nary a quiver over rough pavement.
During our week of testing, every editor
came away impressed with the MX-5’s
sustained sprightliness and newfound
solidity. Of course, it never hurts to be
quicker, too. Our Grand Touring test car,
powered by a 2.0-liter, 170-horse allaluminum four-cylinder and six-speed
68 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

manual, scooted from 0 to 60 in 6.6
seconds and through the quarter mile in
15.1 at 91.3 mph. Compared with the
previous turbo model, the new MX-5 feels
just as quick yet even more fun, thanks to a
slicker, more precise gearbox, telepathic
steering response, and communicative
four-wheel disc brakes. Behind the wheel,
even our tallest pilot was able to find a
comfortable driving position, due to an
interior with four more cubic feet of room.
Moreover, the cockpit is far ritzier than its
predecessor’s, replete with premium
plastics, piano-black trim, and available
leather seats; it even offers four cupholders, side airbags, and a single-release
soft-top that requires just one hand to raise
or stow. The new MX-5 is a car that
envelops you—physically and emotionally—
delivering the light, nimble, quick
essences of a roadster. ■

used to
be among the most rational of automakers.
For example, the first iteration of the W124
E-Class had different-size rearview mirrors
on either side of the car because the
engineers figured that’s what you needed.
Those guys would have a hard time figuring
out an E-Class with a slammed roofline and
only enough seats for four passengers. But
these days, Mercedes-Benz is marketing
driven, not engineering led.
The CLS is all about the styling. Drop a
swoopy body shell on an E-Class chassis,
and, voilà! watch the fashionistas stampede

Mercedes showrooms waving their checkbooks. In the tradition of highly styled cars,
you’ll either love or hate the way it looks.
But it does command attention from those
not fortunate enough to have $73K (gulp!
as-tested) to drop on a fairly impractical
car. A 2+2 interior complements the
zoomy coachwork, with a center console
bin and rolltop desk-like cupholder cover
for backseat passengers, who may, if
they’re the least bit tall, have hit their heads
getting in.
As you’d expect, the CLS feels like an
E-Class with tight bodywork and tighter
interior room. Sold only with Mercedes’s
302-horsepower V-8 or the mighty, blown
5.4-liter AMG engine here, the CLS is more
autobahnsturmer than autocross-nimble. It
felt big, plowing around our short handling
course. The CLS 500 prefers to charge hard
and fast down big Interstate highways. But
it also surprised us on our twisty mountain
circuit, where its seven-speed automatic
always seemed in the right gear, and the
Airmatic suspension’s “sport” setting
minimized body roll. Downside is the
steering, which feels numb and lifeless.
And for daily driving, the triple-mode
Airmatic is too fussy. Why can’t Mercedes
figure out the right suspension setup the
way BMW consistently does? ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 69

★ 2006 contender
mercedes-benz r-class

A NICHE

TOO FAR?
SOMETIMES you can slice the
pie too thin. When the all-new R-Class
showed up on our doorstep, we had high
hopes. This was supposed to be a new
class of vehicle—one with the traction
abilities of an SUV, the versatility of a luxury
wagon, and the performance of a sport
sedan.
With an all-new platform (stretched and
modified from the M-Class and coming
G-Class SUVs), the R-Class is really the first
vehicle to explore the uncharted territory
of the luxury-minivan segment. The luxury
part is easy to see once you sit inside and
push the high-tech start button on the dash,
touch the electronic shifter stalk to “D,” and
paddle through the world’s first sevenspeed Touch Shift automatic. All R-Class
models are three-row six-seaters, come
with all-wheel drive, and offer the choice of
a base 24-valve DOHC 3.5-liter V-6 or the
5.0-liter V-8, producing over 300 horsepower and almost 340 pound-feet of
torque. Our tester came with the powerful
V-8, gushed over by some judges because
of how well it moved the huge and heavy
sled (at 5133 pounds, almost 1000 pounds
70 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

heavier than all other contenders).
Surprisingly, 0-to-60-mph times were close
to the ML500’s at 6.6 seconds. Other highlights include an MP3 player and iPod
plug-in, an enormous twin-glass roof
option, and enough electronic safety
features to keep most people out of
trouble. There’s even a bottle opener.
But it’s when you push the R-Class that its
driving dynamics remind you this is no
sport sedan. While still better than most
any SUV of comparable size, the big M-B’s
electronic stability systems are on highalert to keep cargo and passengers from
upset. Also, the low-geared steering provides minimal road feel and little snap back
to center. Did we mention the price? Our
R500, equipped with everything but a rearseat DVD-player, clocked in at $66,650.
Certainly, there’s a lot of money for a car
here, but not a lot of Car of the Year. ■

OKAY,
SO WHAT’S
IN A NAME?
YOU’VE GOT to wonder what
this car would be if Edsel were still in
business as a class-step between Ford and
Mercury. Ford Motor Company brought
three entries on its CD3 midsize platform
to our party (contrast that with Hyundai,
which brought three all-new cars): the
Fusion, the much fancier Lincoln Zephyr,
and, in the middle but close to the Ford, the
Milan. The Mercury looks more elegant,
grown-up, and urbane than the Fusion, with
a neater, better-integrated grille and with
clean Euro-style LED taillamps in place of
the Fusion’s Focus-like rear lamps. The
Milan and Fusion share the same standard

four and optional V-6, similar handling
dynamics—kind of fun at the limit, but still
midsize-family-car-soft—and
similarly
poor brakes. Standard 16-inch wheels
(optional on Fusion) and optional 17-inch
wheels (not available on Fusion) provide
the only difference in chassis setup.
With a base price $1000 higher than the
Fusion’s, you also get a standard power
driver’s seat, with higher-quality cloth than
the Ford’s, and better trim (the satinaluminum look is optional at no cost),
including cloth door inserts in place of
plastic, and a standard analog clock. The
Milan Premier, available with the I-4 or V-6,
includes leather seats of a quality Mercury
says isn’t available in the Ford.
The differentiation works, at least to the
extent that the Fusion has the blue-collar
look appropriate for Ford, while the Milan
comes off as more white-collar. You can
zoot-up the interior with two-tone seats, if
you’re secure enough in your office job to
wear a loud tie with the white shirt. If you’re
a banker, go with the single-tone interior
and quietly announce your prosperity. The
Fusion got the nod into the group of 10
finalists, and the Milan didn’t because the
Ford is a much higher-volume car.
Otherwise, the Mercury is a more dapper
Fusion, with a more inviting interior. ■
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 71

★ 2006 contender
mitsubishi eclipse gt

PROOF THAT

2006 MITSUBISHI
ECLIPSE

STYLE
ISN’T
EVERYTHING

BASE PRICE RANGE
AS-TESTED PRICE
VEHICLE LAYOUT

WE’LL SAY IT up front: The allnew Eclipse GT is a huge improvement
over the previous generation, but that’s not
the only thing we’re looking for when
seeking a winner. Ultimately, we were left
wanting more: more control, more room,
more visibility. On paper, Mitsubishi’s
investment is good: unique styling inside
and out, more power, stiffer body, wider
track, and more braking. The real-world
results, however, are a mixed bag. The new
3.8-liter V-6 producing 263 horsepower
motivated our GT as one of only four
contestants able to reach 100 mph in the
quarter mile. But all that power channeled
through a front-drive, six-speed manual
transmission makes the driver feel like he’s
keeping two mortal enemies from a fight.
Several editors noted, during hard takeoffs,
the torque steer and front-end lift are so
dramatic they thought something might be
wrong with the front anti-roll bar. However,
we did have high praise for the new frontend geometry for how well it handles
through the twisties. At speed, the GT dives
into and transitions out of hard cornering
72 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

like a pro, as long as you’re smooth on the
throttle.
As to the change in design and styling,
the rounded and flattened shape of the
Eclipse seems almost feminine, which may
not be a bad thing given the traditional
buyer. Inside, though, the sculpted
surfaces and conflagration of interior
colors (three different interior colors! Huh?)
had several testers rubbing their eyes.
Likewise, at night, the eerie ice-blue LED
lighting throughout the interior gave some
of us a headache, while others (our young
bucks) didn’t seem to mind. Overall, the
general consensus was too much going on
in a tight space (note: rear seats are fine for
adults, as long as they’re headless). In the
end, the Eclipse’s sex appeal promises
more than its chassis and driving
experience can deliver. ■

AFTER ALL the industry hype,
unabashed television promotions, the
promises spoken and unspoken that this is
the car that would prove once and for all
GM knows where it needs to go to remain
competitive, our impression fell somewhat
short after living with the little guy for
several weeks. At first sight, the Solstice is a
stunner. With echoes of the swoopy Jaguar
D-Type, the aggressive stance of a Lotus
Elise, and the personal involvement of Bob
Lutz himself, the Solstice makes big
promises. The exterior design and its
intended mission are among the most
daring to come out of General Motors
since Ed Cole’s Corvair shocked the
industry in 1959. On paper, the Solstice
makes the numbers it should as a two-seat
sports car, but isn’t overly rewarding
getting there. One run up through the
gears presents the sound of an engine
lacking the sweetness of its archrival, the
Mazda MX-5. Steering, suspension,
transmission, and throttle response don’t

$19,995

ENGINE

2.4L/177-hp/166 lb-ft
DOHC 16-valve I-4

meld as well as they do in that car, either.
Then there are the haphazard ergonomics
in the hard, plasticky interior. GM has more
data on biomechanics than almost any other
automaker, but rolling down the power
windows is as difficult as touching one’s
elbow with the fingers of the same arm.
The retractable cupholder located on the
waterfall between the seats is darn near
inaccessible. And then there’s the soft-top
that at times took 10 minutes to clip back
into place. There’s value here: a solid chassis,
big rolling stock, eye appeal, and attractive
pricing. But the details fall short, replaced
by a wish list. Call this a stand-up double or
perhaps a triple—but at least a base short
of the promised home run. ■

geezer pleaser got even better this time
around. The third-generation Avalon is
more of a performer than it probably needed
to be. With the addition of a 3.5-liter,
268-horsepower V-6, do you suppose
people interested in this car—those who
want a cushy, long-range cruiser, but can’t
find a Detroit brand they trust—would ever
care that it can run to 60 mph in just over
six seconds? This Avalon’s better than it
needed to be to maintain its current
reputation. Smooth, comfortable, and quiet,
the new Avalon is perfect for that 300-mile
trip up the coast in the stately, assured
manner a Buick used to manage. But unless
you live in Palm Beach, it’s probably not
what you’d want to take home to impress
the neighbors: It’s the stealth fighter in the
near-lux segment that most other people
will overlook. Outside, the Avalon’s styling
is a mix of understated luxury and underthe-radar conservatism. Inside, though, it’s
a different story: The clever and attractive
interior boasts cool details like milky-white
buttons and folding, retracting covers that
76 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

hide nonessential hardware such as the
sound-system head unit, and various
storage compartments. Risky? Maybe. But
it’s what gives this generation Avalon a
spark of personality the previous ones
sorely lacked. It makes us wonder whether
this Toyota is in danger of stealing business
away from the Lexus ES 330, the weakest
link in Toyota’s otherwise formidable
luxury-car franchise. Especially as the
Avalon’s starting price is just over $27,000.
Having said that, our loaded tester
approached $38K by the time all the
options had been totaled. Toyota is clearly
betting that low-impact, soft-around-themiddle retirees are as well financed as they
are in a hurry to get to the coast. ■

VW’S JETTA has long enjoyed a
loyal following among youthful hip
urbanites, but that may be changing. A
completely redesigned Jetta went on sale
last March, and we darned it with faint praise
for its comfortable, quiet ride, roomy back
seat, and adroit handling, while sharply
criticizing its all-new inline-five-cylinder
engine for a coarse idle, moaning engine
note, and leisurely 8.3-second 0-to-60-mph
performance. A turbodiesel variant good
for up to 46 mpg and packing 177 poundfeet of torque joined the lineup in May, and a
frisky 2.0-liter direct-injected turbo engine
shared with the Audi A3 recently went on
sale. Either of those engines would
undoubtedly have won the Jetta a few more
friends among our voting panel than did our
2.5 model.
This car struck us as having strayed off of
VW’s beaten “Drivers Wanted” path. The
steering heft and chassis balance are
beyond reproach, but carrying an extra 300plus pounds relative to its predecessor, this
new base Jetta simply doesn’t attack a
mountain road as enthusiastically as its
78 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

forebear did. The larger car is much better
suited to transporting four full-size adults,
and it’s still finished in high-grade materials,
but there’s little innovation to be enjoyed in
the interior design or appointments, and the
exterior trades bulldog butchness for
chrome-nosed dressy formality. It all
prompted several editors to bemoan the fact
that the new car seems optimized for the
German pensioners who constitute the bulk
of the home-market audience, which seems
sure to alienate the car’s Gen-X/Y base here
in North America.
Without its formerly perky personality, the
Jetta seems a harder sell against the benchmark Asian products in the same size/price
category. We still believe the base Jetta
models are an attractive buy at below
$20,000, but as the options add up, the value
equation tilts in favor of Honda or Toyota. ■

this year’s contest with some of the
strongest credentials in the field—a
3.6-liter, 280-horse V-6, a six-speed automatic, 0 to 60 in under six seconds, and a
quarter-mile trap speed of over 100 mph.
For a family sedan, the Passat possesses
the goods of a musclecar. Yet despite its
robust qualifications, the Passat failed to
make it to the second round of 10. So what
gives? All of the Passat’s spanking power
seems to have supplanted the refinement
that made its predecessor such an
engaging car. For instance, corralling the
new car’s 280 ponies through the front tires,
especially during acceleration testing,
proved to be a frustrating exercise in
moderation. As a result, maybe a Passat 2.0
would have fared better, especially since
its seamless and torquey 197-horsepower
turbocharged direct-injection four-cylinder
would’ve lessened the weight without
sacrificing much of the off-the-line, aroundtown oomph. Second, the Passat’s front
80 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

strut/rear multilink suspension felt spongy
at times, resulting in excessive body roll.
And whereas past Passats seemed like
Audis with cash on the hood, the new car
felt more akin to a scaled-down Phaeton
that underwent cost-cutting. Our tester, a
loaded V-6 front-driver, possessed an
interior that didn’t strike us as richer than
its predecessor’s. That said, the new Passat
3.6 does pack a punch when it comes to
standard equipment, which includes a
power sunroof, 17-inch wheels, an in-dash
six-CD changer, six airbags, a tirepressure-monitoring system, and stability
control. In the bang-for-the-buck department,
the Passat doesn’t disappoint, delivering
lofty levels of acceleration and accessories.
It simply lacks that Teutonic passion and
character that would’ve made a
Volkswagen our Car of the Year. ■

★
FaNTaSTICFOUR
A WINDSHIELD MORE RAKISH THAN AN ACURA NSX’S. ONE HAS AN
8000-RPM REDLINE. ANOTHER GETS 50 MPG. AND EVEN WITH
VOICE-ACTIVATED NAVIGATION AND XM RADIO, YOU CAN GET ONE FOR
ABOUT THE PRICE OF SEAN CONNERY’S TOUPEE. HONDA’S FOUR NEW
FOUR-CYLINDER CIVICS SET THE NEW CLASS BENCHMARK

OUR PHOTOGRAPHERS

had zoomed in on
our 2006 Motor Trend Car of the Year winner before we’d even
voted. “When you drivers passed our photo locations on the test
route,” said one, “depending on the car, some of you were visibly
pushing harder than others. But every single time the Civic Si
came toward us, no matter who was driving it, we’d hear the
engine screaming at the redline, the tires yowling for grip, and
then the Honda would flash by, the driver grinning like Cameron
Diaz on payday. We got it all on film.”
It’s true: At the flamboyant wheel of Honda’s brand-new bottle
rocket, we dropped our professional poker faces, lost our journalistic
composure. An 8000-rpm redline, a light-switch six-speed, and Terrell
Owens moves will do that to you. But this new Honda is more than just
one great performance bargain.The 2006 Civic lineup encompasses four
new models: the sizzling Si, the sleek Coupe, the elegant Sedan,
and the 50-mpg Hybrid. Each one is a winner. When we sat down to
■

words arthur st. antoine

■

photographs jerry garns

82 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

vote, it wasn’t even close: out of 12 judges, 11 voted Civic.
Forget what you think you know about this Honda. The outgoing
2005 Civic was a quality automobile—well crafted, capable, a
strong value—but it didn’t tingle the fingertips, never moved the
“gee!” meter. The new 2006 Civic does. Honda deserves a
standing ovation for not playing it safe again, for crafting a
compact car that’s edgier and more soulful than it needs to be.
The automotive joy that Honda Motor Company was founded on
radiates from these new Civics.
In picking a winner, we look for significance, superiority, and
value. Significance? The Civic has been the best-selling retail
compact car in the U.S. for the past nine years. Honda expects
sales of the new model to be even stronger—to well over 300,000
units for 2006. Value? A base Civic Coupe DX starts at just
$14,910, and even fully loaded Civics hover in the low 20s.
Superiority? Read on…

HONDA CIVIC Si

MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 83

2006 car of the year

★★★★★ honda civic
WHY WE LOVE
THE CIVIC Si
■ IT’S A SCREAMER
Indicated redline on the Si’s tach is 8000
rpm. The limiter doesn’t kick in until
8500 rpm. The engine feels like it would
happily spin to 10,000. Sure, you could
gun a Chevy Cobalt SS or a Ford Focus
ZX4 ST to 8500 rpm. Once.

■ LIKE FLOYD MAYWEATHER,
LEAN BUT PACKS A PUNCH
The Si’s new DOHC, twin-cam, 2.0-liter
four produces 197 horsepower (a
23-percent increase over the old Si) at
7800 rpm and 139 pound-feet of torque
(up five percent) at 6200. The engine
uses Honda’s electronically controlled
i-VTEC system with Variable Timing
Control, which continuously adjusts
valve timing, lift, and duration on the
intake and exhaust valves—boosting
power and fuel efficiency.

★

■ DOESN’T WASTE PONIES
The Si comes standard with a helical
limited-slip differential. Power into a hard
turn, and the LSD transmits more torque
to the loaded outside front wheel, which
has more grip. Translation: The Si doesn’t
waste power (or rubber) burning up the
inside front tire.

■ THE JOY OF SIX
The Si’s one and only transmission is a
fabulous short-throw six-speed manual
with a low final-drive for improved
acceleration. The gear ratios are
brilliantly matched to the powerband,

alloy wheels, and a 350-watt, sevenspeaker stereo with subwoofer, CD
player, and MP3 capability. The only
options are satellite navigation (with XM
Radio) and summer tires.

too—upshift at the redline, for instance,
and the revs drop to 6000 rpm, right
where the i-VTEC system shifts the
cams for high-rpm mode.

■ HARD TO CATCH
Let the i-VTEC engine rip, and the Si
zooms from 0 to 60 mph in just 6.7
seconds. Handling is even more
compelling. Compared with the Coupe,
the Si gets higher spring rates, tauter
damping, bigger anti-roll bars, and
17-inch wheels and tires. There’s 0.9 g of
lateral grip on tap (that’s Corvette
territory)—in hard corners, the Si tries
to wring your head off your neck. In our
slalom test, the Si outran every car in the
competition except the BMW 330i Sport.
Which costs about $20,000. More.

■ THAT’S NOT A WINDSHIELD—
IT’S A FIGHTER-JET CANOPY
At an angle of 21.9 degrees, the Si’s front
glass rakes back even faster than the
windshield in the Acura NSX exotic
sports car (23.9 degrees). Rivals look
positively blunt by comparison: The Mini
Cooper’s windshield stands tall at 40.9
degrees; the Scion tC’s at 49.0.

■ HOLY SPOKES: IT’S A MONSTER
Is it just us, or does the Si’s bizarrely
contoured steering wheel—with its builtin radio controls and perforated center
spoke—somehow remind you of the
mask in “Scream”? Just try to name a
steering wheel with more character.

■ “SI” IS PRACTICALLY
A SYNONYM FOR “VALUE”
Though final Si prices hadn’t been set as
we went to press, Honda predicts a base
sticker of about $20,000 (navigation and
XM Radio will add $1750). If that doesn’t
seem like a steal, consider this: The
toupee Sean Connery wore in “The Hunt
for Red October” also cost $20,000.

■ A COCKPIT FROM “STAR
TREK”—AND IT WORKS
The Si’s spacey dash is such a riot of
swoops and curves, it’s momentarily
startling—this is a Honda? Get down to
the business of spirited driving, though,
and the cabin suddenly seems customtailored. The only gauge in the center
binnacle is a big analog tachometer. Up
above—right where your eyes look for
it—is a large, easy-to-read digital
speedo, flanked by bar readouts for
engine temp and fuel level. The simple
audio and climate controls jut out toward
your hand. The view over the drop-away

■ A FEAST FOR TUNERS
The Si makes damn near 100 naturally
aspirated horsepower per liter straight out
of the box. It’s already a tuner car. Can
you imagine how hot these things are
gonna be once the Fast & Furious crowd
starts bolting on performance bits?

■ LOOKS LIKE THE CONCEPT CAR
We’ve seen the sketches of future Honda
models before. And then we’ve seen the
production versions, which often seem
so staid in comparison it’s as if the Feds
did the finish-work. Not this Si. Look at
that wild body. Now look again.
Everybody else does.

■ SITS WELL
The front seats rock—they’re deeply
bolstered, fabric-covered sport jobs
with suede side inserts to help hold you
in place. They also offer a full two inches
of vertical adjustment. For shorter rides
a six-footer can comfortably sit in back
behind a six-foot driver.

■ IT’S ALL IN THE DETAILS
The power windows open and close
with one touch. So does the moonroof.
The rear floor is flat for enhanced foot
comfort. An ambient light above the
driver casts a soft cabin glow that
matches the red of the tachometer. The
stereo offers speed-sensitive volume
control and CD Text capability; it also
can be programmed to display a
personalized welcome screen.

■ THE SOUND OF SUZUKA
Find a tunnel or a road with a nearby
wall. Roll down the Si’s windows. Stand
on the gas ’til the tach needle swings
past 6000. Listen to that.

WHY WE LOVE
THE CIVIC HYBRID
■ CRYING OVER GAS PRICES
IS OVER
Drive it on the highway, drive it in the
city, the Hybrid delivers an estimated
EPA fuel economy of 50 mpg. That’s
even better than the smaller, less powerful,
far less stylish 2005 Civic Hybrid, which
delivered 47/48 city/highway mpg. Also,
Honda says real-world economy should
be far closer to EPA estimates than with
rival hybrid cars.

■ IT’S NOT A PENALTY BOX
Honda’s fourth-generation “integrated
motor assist” hybrid is the company’s
most powerful and fuel-efficient ever.
Combining an SOHC, 1.3-liter i-VTEC
four-cylinder engine with a 15-kilowatt DC
brushless motor and a continuously
variable transmission, the hybrid powertrain delivers 110 horsepower at 6000
rpm and 123 pound-feet at just 2500.

■ THEY’VE IMPROVED
EVERYTHING
Compared with the outgoing model, a
new internal permanent magnet in the
2006 Hybrid’s DC motor produces 80
percent more torque and 50 percent
more power in the same space. The nickelmetal-hydride battery packs are smaller
yet store more power (158 volts versus
144). A new cooperative regenerative
braking system uses the electric motor
as much as possible to help with
braking, freeing up the conventional
hydraulic brakes to extract 170 percent
more of the vehicle’s kinetic energy
when stopping.

■ YOU CAN DRIVE IN THE
CARPOOL LANE—ALONE
Because it’s rated as an Advanced

Technology Partial Zero Emissions
vehicle, the Hybrid can legally be driven
in California’s High Occupancy Vehicle
highway lanes with only the driver on
board.

■ LIKE ALL CIVICS, IT CARES
In all 2006 Civic models, Honda has
reduced use of toxic PVC and Bromine
materials. All Civics also feature
“pedestrian friendly” collapsible hood
and fender areas.

WHY WE LOVE
THE CIVIC COUPE
& SEDAN
■ THE EYES HAVE IT
The Civic has such a well-earned
reputation for quality and economy,
Honda could’ve produced another
relentlessly sensible version and still
sold ’em like U2 tickets. But the
company aimed much higher. These
new Civics are rolling artwork. Look at
those rakish rooflines, the luscious flow
of metal, the way the tires fill the wheelwells (Honda claims the narrowest tireto-body gaps in the class).

■ THEY’RE
DIFFERENT
For the first time
ever, the Civic
Coupe and Sedan
ride on unique
wheelbases. The
Coupe’s is 1.2
inches longer than
last year’s wheelbase; the Sedan’s grows by a full 3.2
inches. Both body styles are nearly an
inch and a half wider than their
predecessors’—the Civic Sedan is now
as big as an old Accord. The racy

★
★
★

HONDA CIVIC HYBRID
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 85

2006 car of the year

★★★★★ honda civic
FROM OUR
LOGBOOKS…

FROM OUR
LOGBOOKS…

“WOW! THIS

“MAKES YOU

IS THE MOST

THINK MAYBE

HIGHLY STYLED

THE FUEL-

CIVIC I’VE EVER

CRISIS ERA

SEEN. MAYBE

MIGHT BE

THE MOST

TOLERABLE.”

STYLED DASH
SINCE THE NSX.”

“HONDA HAS

“FEELS LIKE

MANY NEAR-

BROUGHT

A CAR IN AN

LUXURY

★

ENTIRELY

TANGIBLES

DIFFERENT

TO THE

CLASS.”

AFFORDABLE
COMPACT

“THERE’S A

SEGMENT.”

VELVETY

FLUIDITY TO

“EASIEST

SPEEDO ON

THIS CAR’S

EVERY MOVE

THE MARKET

TO READ.

THAT SETS IT

APART.”

★

PERFECT FOR

“ON THE Si, I LOVE
THE REV-LIMITER

WARNING THAT
FLASHES

ALONGSIDE THE
DIGITAL SPEEDO.

COOL.”

“Si REDEFINES
THE SEGMENT.

QUICK, TONS OF FUN,
ROCK-SOLID, AND

WELL EQUIPPED.
IMPRESSIVE CAR AT

AN AMAZING PRICE.”

86 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

THE GRAN
TURISMO

GENERATION.”

Coupe is actually 0.6 inch shorter in
length and 1.4 inches lower in height than
the 2005 car.

■ GO AHEAD: DRIVE HARD
Don’t be fooled by the Civic’s economycar roots. The 2006s haven’t forgotten
enthusiasts. Underneath is an all-new
suspension, a revised strut design up front
and what Honda calls a “multilink double
wishbone” at the rear. The Coupe gets
stiffer springs and shocks than the fourdoor, but even the Sedan EX circles the
skidpad at 0.82 g. Some sport sedans
don’t handle this well.

■ FIRST-CLASS ALL THE WAY
The available navigation display—the first
in a Civic—isn’t a low-rent unit; it’s a
beauteous, 6.5-inch color touchscreen. A
tilt and telescoping steering wheel is
standard on all models. The available automatic is an electronically controlled fivespeed. The standard ABS is a premium
four-channel system. Every Civic gets an
electronic “drive-by-wire” throttle to
optimize engine response in all driving
conditions. And the audio system includes
an auxiliary jack for an iPod or other MP3
player.

■ MORE POWER TO YA
The Civic Coupe and Sedan get an
SOHC, 16-valve, 1.8-liter four that utilizes
a new version of Honda’s i-VTEC system
to produce 140 horsepower (up 13 from
the old EX) and 128 pound-feet of torque
(14 more than the 2005 EX), while also
improving emissions from ULEV-1
standards to the stricter ULEV-2 in all 50
states. Despite the increases in body size,
fuel economy is an impressive 30/40
city/highway mpg with the automatic.

■ THEY EVEN TUNED
THE “THUNK” OF THE DOORS
Honda says body rigidity is up 35 percent
compared with the previous model and
claims the 2006 model is the quietest Civic
ever. Engineers also created a special
“bumping door seal” that transmits an
expensive-sounding vibration through the
door when it’s closed.

■ YOU CAN AFFORD ONE
The base Civic Coupe DX—with ABS, six
airbags, tilt/telescoping wheel, 140-horse
engine, and power windows—starts at just
$14,910. Even a fully loaded Sedan EX, with
satellite navigation, XM Radio, and automatic
transmission, costs just $21,110. ■

>> NOT A RACE CAR FOR THE ROAD—
IN SPITE OF ITS 1001 HORSEPOWER AND
250+ MPH TOP SPEED—BUT THE WORLD’S
MOST OUTRAGEOUS LUXURY GT. EVER >>

90 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

(first drive) pagani zonda f

●●●

words matt stone >>

●●●

photographs mark bramley >>

MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 91

(first drive) bugatti veyron 16.4

●●●

ORIGINAL European-spec
1001-horsepower estimate
translates to 987 SAE net. But
Bugatti has revised the Veyron’s
production outputs—which means
we get all 1001 and a cute gauge
to prove it.

EACH HANDBUILT Bugatti
Veyron costs $1.25 million. Its extraordinary
W-16 engine has as many cylinders and
turbochargers as four Subaru WRXs—and
more horsepower. The big, bad Bug
accelerates quicker than a NASCAR stocker
and is faster than a Formula 1 machine, yet
it’s as docile as a Lexus. It’s the fastest,
quickest, and most expensive production
road car ever sold.
The Veyron is the vision of one man—
retired VW Group chairman Ferdinand
Piëch—and Bugatti won’t make a dime on
its entire anticipated production run of just
300 cars (50 per year max, with
approximately one third of those headed
to the United States). Its main mission is the
ultimate brand flagship, reintroducing this
storied French marque to the marketplace
in more-than-fine style.
Comparisons with the Ferrari Enzo,
Maserati MC12, Mercedes-Benz SLR, and
the McLaren F1 of a decade ago are
inevitable but irrelevant—they interpret
race-car ethos into an exotic street
machine. Instead, the Veyron 16.4 was
conceived as the world’s ultimate luxury
gran turismo, which just happens to

employ considerable race-car technology
and performance to get there. A significant
difference.
We drove the Veyron 16.4, and, indeed,
it’s an experience like no other. There isn’t
enough room in this magazine to describe
all its techno-wizardry, and our test gear
has yet to be strapped to this amazing
machine. But let’s have a look and taste of
the car that’ll be parking in front of the
Casino in Monte Carlo, tearing up the
autobahns, and starring on the lawns of the
Pebble Beach Concours d’Elegance 50
years from now.

VEYRON: ON THE ROAD
As I pilot the 16.4 through one of Sicily’s
mile-long tunnels, and the speedo swings

past 280 kilometers per hour (about 174
mph), I now know what it feels like to be a
hollow-point slug traveling down the barrel
of a long-nose 44 Magnum. Potent forces
lunge me forward, the tunnel’s lights blur
into streaks, and the W-16’s subwoofered
rumble is magnified by the rock walls. That
tiny white dot way up ahead represents the
end of the barrel, and bursting out into the
daylight is as bright as any weapon’s
muzzle flash.
Mashing the gas brings a controlled
thousand (and one!) horsepower response
that must be felt to be believed. The four
turbos and engine-management system
serve power as fast as the tires can stand it,
and the gravity presses your internal
organs together. You slow down to a mere

10 coolest things about the Bugatti Veyron…
1. A SECOND KEY is required
to program the car into its top
“Speed” mode.

2. HOW MANY OTHER cars
are ballsy enough to have a
horsepower gauge?

3. THE TOP OF the engine is
exposed; there’s no glass or other
cover.

4. IT’LL SCORE you the best
parking place at any restaurant
anywhere in the world.

5. THE AUDIO system costs $30 grand.
6. SWITCH THE stability control
off, and it’ll spin all four wheels in
third gear.

7. GOING 0-TO-250 mph takes
less than a minute.

92 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

WWWW

8. AT FULL THROTTLE

in seventh gear, the Veyron gets
less than three mpg.

9. WHAT LOOKS LIKE
a secondary rear spoiler is in fact
an air brake.

10. BUGATTI REQUIRES
a deposit of more than $350,000
just to place an order.

(first drive) bugatti veyron 16.4

100 or so, just so you can spool up the
snails and do it all again.
Yet, for all its brute force, there’s polish,
sophistication, smoothness. The ride is firm
while suppler than that of any other exotic.
Hit a bump, and there’s none of the body
crashing and bashing evident with many
stiffly sprung, carbon-fiber intensive
machines. Wind noise is commendably
low, although the amount of road rumble
allowed by the Veyron-specific Michelin
PAX tires is dependent upon road surface
and condition.
The well-weighted steering responds
quickly at low speeds, yet even as it heads
into hyperspace, the Veyron tracks straight
and true. There’s aero management at play:
movable diffuser panels in the front end,
speed-adjustable ride height, rear undertray diffusers, and a serious rear wing.
These are necessities for a car that’ll hit
200 mph with ease. Although we’re not
able to drive 250 on public roads, the
Bugatti’s high-speed stability—an ongoing
problem early in the car’s development—is
faultless at sane, and even insane, speeds.
The 8.0-liter W-16 engine is unlike
anything that’s ever propelled an automobile.
Its huge displacement and well-managed
quartet of turbos ensure it has power any94 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

where in the rev range. In spite of the big
numbers, it’s not a high-strung revver like
the V-12 in the Ferrari Enzo or McLaren F1.
It rumbles more like a small earthquake,
the Richter-scale factor of which can be
controlled by your right foot. It starts with a
whirr, idles like a Rolex, and thunders out
enough power to pin your spine to the seat.
As amazing as the powerplant is, it’s the
transmission that impresses. VW group’s
dual-clutch sequential gearbox technology
(Audi TT VR6, A3) has been supersized to
handle this mountain of power and given
seven ratios to do so. Shifts are
instantaneous, with none of the lurching or
delay common in other auto-clutch manuals.
Downshifts are equally outstanding,
accompanied by a proper, rev-matching
throttle blip. Ferrari already wants to buy
the design.
The cabin is awash in beautiful
looking/feeling/smelling materials. All the
stuff that seems like satin-finished
aluminum really is, and the only no-cost
option is a choice of “comfort” or “sport”
seats; we prefer the latter. If there’s a downer, it’s visibility. There’s a blind spot on the
right side, and the left-side mirror placement
isn’t ideal, either.The nav screen is embedded
in the rearview mirror—good for line of

sight—but it’s way small. And the front
trunk is shoebox-size, but it is enough to
hold your companion’s cocktail dress and
a bottle of Cristal.
Bugatti has delivered on every one of
the Veyron’s considerable promises. It
meets the criteria set forth by Chairman
Piëch when it was announced and does so
with aplomb. Luxurious, elegant, imposing,
exclusive, crazy expensive, and mindbendingly fast, the Veyron sets a new high
watermark for grand-touring transport. ■

Zonda S
always was the best supercar money
couldn’t buy. The new Zonda F is even
more so: better than ever, more money
than ever (more than half a mil, ex-taxes),
and even less legal than ever—at least here
in the U.S. But it’s worth your attention
because it’s so exquisite, so outrageous,
and so damn good. And its maker vows
that, by 2008, he’ll use his skills to develop
a car that complies with federal
regulations. Just to help him on his way,
Mercedes AMG supplies his V-12 engines.
It’s hard to imagine a higher vote of
confidence than that.
In Europe and most of the rest of the
world, Horacio Pagani’s hypercar
appeared out of more or less nowhere at
the turn of the millennium and from a
standing start made the best efforts of
Ferrari, Lamborghini, and Porsche look
stark. Think Enzo or Carrera GT. That’s
where the new Zonda F has pegged its
performance. It just happens to be a lot
more luxurious and in many ways better to
drive—for the everyday dawdle and when
it’s deploying the full 594-horsepower mind
warp.
This car ingests roadway with a hunger
that borders on violence. Straights shorten
as they cascade into curves, and
sequences of curves compress into one
98 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

another like an intestinal tract. Your vision
tunnels ahead, your periphery blocked out
by a brain working at full bandwidth to
process the oncoming rush to extract those
stimuli essential to guiding the car though
this maelstrom. A deluge of fearsome
sound issues from the V-12 and echoes
back from every direction, filling the entire
valley through which you drive. Your
muscles tense against the immense forces

*

bend. Just squeeze ’n’ go. And yet, unlike a
turbocharged engine, response is precise,
each micro increment of right-foot
pressure bringing its exact and rich
reward—all accompanied by the sound of
an early-1990s Formula 1 warmup lap.
So AMG’s V-12 is sensational, but even
that isn’t as good as the chassis. You’d
expect immense grip, but probably not the
exquisite connectedness, road feel, and
confidence the Pagani provides. It
magnetizes itself into corners, and in the
tightest ones you feel the limit at the front
tires. Then there’s the option of spooling in
more power to make the rear tires work,
letting the traction control take the strain. In
fast corners, you get that miraculous extra
sureness and balance from the downforce.
We had no chance to verify it, but Pagani
talks 1.3 g plus. The brakes are a match:
Their power is shattering. More than that,
it’s all about feel and confidence again. You
pull up straight and true even if it’s bumpy,
your seatbelts stretched, and your lungs
involuntarily emptied.
The suspension is compliant. That
doesn’t just mean the Zonda can handle

THE CAR INGESTS

ROADWAY
THAT BORDERS ON VIOLENCE
WITH A HUNGER

of acceleration then braking then
cornering.
This performance is extraordinary, but
so is its delivery. The sheer size of the
engine allows 561 pound-feet of torque,
peaking at 4000 rpm. This hectic
abundance of midrange shove means you
can shift gears at times when other
considerations allow. There’s nothing
wrong with the six-speeder’s action (it’s
been finessed since the S version’s). But
you don’t have to shift down to overtake;
you don’t find yourself shifting because
you’ve run out of revs in an unfamiliar

pizza-crusted Italian surfaces without
hopping about; it means usability over long
distances or when constrained by urban
running—a light twin-plate clutch and
decent all-round visibility helps.
Indeed, the Pagani denies few amenities,
despite its Le Mans-like performance.
Climb across a broad sill into that bowl-like
cabin and settle into a carbon bucket seat.
You find effective air-conditioning, a fine
stereo, and navigation. While we’re inside,
check the instruments, an array that, due to
their exquisite nature and unhappily tiny
diameters, seems to have come from a

(first drive) pagani zonda f

watchmaker. The speedometer reads to
250 mph, so its insignificant needle barely
creeps into action before you’re breaking
any limit. In any other car, the idea of
scarlet, quilted-leather floormats in place
of carpet would seem an absurd vulgarity,
but the Zonda carries it off thanks to its
overall commitment to material richness
and the breathtaking quality and
craftsmanship.
Yet there’s an oddly fragile—or at least
dainty—look to it all: The seats are shells,
the instruments a glazed pod, the airconditioning ducting, a visible carbonfiber structure, the pedals a set of small
jeweled aluminum discs set atop bonelike
levers, the glovebox a separate leather
case hung below the bonelike cross-car
beam. In blood red, carbon black, and polished aluminum, the test car’s interior is
overwhelming.
There’s something of the night about the
Zonda’s exterior design, too. Its
proportions are brutal, its detailing
exquisite yet intimidating. Its piercing nose
is short and to the point. The cockpit
perches far forward, like the eye of some
mythical monocular creature. Aft, the bodywork broadens into a rear deck stretched
over the gigantic engine, transmission, and
tires. Like the Enzo, it’s more about
purpose than beauty, and some of those
details could be considered fussy. But it’ll
snare you the world’s best parking spot,
anywhere, any time.
Don’t make the mistake of believing that
Pagani’s tiny production numbers deny it
technology. The Zonda has a carbon-fiber
tub, with chrome-moly load-bearing
frames at each end, all clad in carbon
bodywork of considerable lay-up quality.
For the F version, much of the carbon uses
a new type of mat that’s woven with fibers
in three orientations, and the CroMo tubing
has been honed thinner. Indeed, most
changes for the F have been in pursuit of
lightness as well as power. “It’s hard to
remove 100 pounds from a car that was
already 1000 pounds lighter than a
100 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

Mercedes SLR McLaren,” says Horacio
Pagani quietly. Such is the man: as understated as his car is overstated.
He hadn’t hitherto been impressed with
carbon-ceramic brakes. So Brembo
developed a new 380mm set for him. They
weigh half as much as iron rotors and stop
like a wall; but unlike most, they aren’t
noisy. Much of the bodywork is subtly
modified for the new F version in pursuit of
aerodynamic downforce and stability, plus
lightness. The suspension is even lighter
now than before; it has special Öhlins
adjustable shocks, and its geometry is
reworked compared with the Zonda S to
make best use of the colossal new, custom
Michelins: 255/35R19s at the front and
335/30R20s out back.
The engine represents continual
development by AMG of a unit now unused
by Mercedes, which has switched to forced
induction for its ultimate powerhouses.
Turbocharging the V-12 goes against the
switchblade sharpness Pagani requires,
and so AMG keeps working this engine
just for Pagani. AMG engineers say they
enjoy this work: The results indicate they
do, too. The Zonda S already has a 7.3-liter
capacity, titanium rods, and valve gear
capable of 7000 rpm.
For the F version, effort has gone into
lightening the overall package and
improving induction and exhaust flow. It
now makes 594 horsepower, mandating
stronger transmission internals and diff
gears. So under that Plexiglas porthole, we
see the new induction manifold, a set of
organ pipes to satisfy the Wagner in you.
They’re hydroformed from an aviation alloy
to reduce wall thickness to 1 mm and
provide an inner surface that doesn’t trouble the howling gale of incoming air. The
exhaust manifolds are hydroformed, too,
and you have a choice: 1mm-thick stainless
steel or 0.7mm-thick Inconel. And that
trashcan-size silencer is, as a further
option, formed of titanium. As the ounces
fall off, the dollars mount. By thousands.
Sixty Zondas have now been sold. Some

of them have come to the U.S., albeit—
cough—“not for highway use.” But Pagani
knows he must serve us rightly and is planning his 2008 model. Unfortunately, to
match the power of the current car while
making U.S. emissions targets, he’ll likely
have to use the twin-turbo AMG engine. It’ll
be faster and torquier, but will it have this
engine’s narcotic bite? Indeed, the same
might be said of the whole car. Can it be
repeated?
It’s probably only this stunning level of
competence that lets this car get away with
such visual flamboyance. If the dynamics
scorecard had but the hint of a hanging
chad, you’d dismiss the looks as overwrought. The Zonda F is a force of nature: It
puts you in the very eye of a storm, and it
really is as exciting as it looks. More surprising, it’s good enough to justify that
stratospheric price. ■ ■ ■

is
curved like a fishbowl. And we are the fish.
Outside, hundreds of fans lining the pit wall
of Italy’s Mugello racetrack are elbowing
for a better view of the car we’re sitting in,
the brand-new FXX, a supercar so rockstar excessive it makes the almighty Enzo
look like a teacher’s pet. I’m in the passenger
seat, lungs clamped tight by a five-point
racing harness, all-too aware that every
onlooker is asking in Italian, “Chi? Who the
hell is that?” The man on my left, though, is
recognized by all: Belted into the driver’s
seat is Piero Lardi Ferrari, the 61-year-old
son of Enzo Ferrari and current vice chairman (and 10-percent owner) of the
automaker his father founded in 1947.
Ferrari’s fingers tap the steering wheel;
he’s clearly feeling the pressure of giving
his company’s 789-horsepower, streetillegal “Super Enzo” its first public workout. “I’m sorry you have to ride with me,”
he says with a shy smile, his face a haunting
likeness of his father’s iconic profile. “I
think I am not so fast.”
Whether Ferrari is fast or not, the tifosi
are here. Some 30,000 of them have come
to Mugello to attend the final day of the
annual Ferrari World Finals weekend, a
racing-red orgy of speed and wealth that
106 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

includes the championship runoffs of the
Ferrari Challenge race series, gala dinners
for the company’s best customers, lots of
European playboys arm in arm with skinny
ladies in Chanel sunglasses, celebrity
guests, laps by vintage Ferrari race cars, an
F1 demonstration by Michael Schumacher
and Rubens Barrichello, and—everywhere
you look—Ferraris of every shape and
description.
Suddenly, a mechanic in red Ferrari
overalls is signaling us with a furious twirl
of his fingers. Time to go. With the press of
a button, Ferrari starts Ferrari and the FXX
explodes to life, the shattering exhaust note
of its unfiltered, 6.3-liter V-12 causing
everyone to step back and clamp their
hands against their ears. Another aide in a
red Ferrari racing jacket waves us out of
the garage. The pit-exit light is green. The
track is ours.
The schedule calls for a series of gentle
parade laps. But Piero Ferrari is an Italian—
and driving a spectacular new Ferrari in
front of a wildly enthusiastic home crowd.
He stands on the gas.
The FXX charges like an angry rhino
onto the circuit, my view blurring into a funnel
of waving spectators and onrushing asphalt
as Ferrari flicks the right shift paddle again

and again, the transmission hammering up
through the gears, the untrimmed carbonfiber cockpit an echo chamber with a
789-horsepower monster screaming inside
it. We charge down the front straight,
Ferrari leaning into the steering wheel, his
right foot mashing the throttle. Ahead,
approaching fast, lie the first tight turns of
the tricky Mugello circuit…

“THE FXX ISN’T A CAR,” says
Amedeo Felisa, Ferrari’s soft-spoken vice
general manager and the man largely
responsible for the last decade’s worth of
Ferrari road cars. “It’s a concept.” What a
concept: 29 of Ferrari’s richest, luckiest
customers will become, in effect, drivers
for Team Ferrari. After buying an FXX,
they’ll be trained at Fiorano by Ferrari’s top
drivers, test the car over the next two years
during at least 12 company-supported
track sessions (four each in Europe, Japan,
and the United States), and share their
downloaded track data with Ferrari
technicians.
“The FXX will not be raced,” says Felisa.
“It’s a test car only. Just as Schumacher
helped us develop the Enzo, we intend to
use the data we obtain from our 29 FXX
clients to help us produce future Ferraris of

(first spin) ferrari fxx

extreme performance. We want to build
supercars that are tuned not just for
professional racing drivers.” The price for
this ultimate Walter Mitty fantasy: 1.6
million Euros—nearly two million U.S.
dollars (that sum does include a custom
driving suit and helmet, though). And, yes,
all 29 FXXs are already sold.
Ferrari’s code name for the Enzo was FX,
so adding an extra “X” seemed appropriate
for a follow-up car with something extra—
and then some. The FXX is a track-only car;
it has no turn signals or other “civilian”
gear, and it’s designed to run on specially
made 19-inch Bridgestone slicks. Behind
the FXX’s cockpit, the V-12 has been
enlarged from 5998 to 6262 cc and features
redesigned combustion chambers, a new
crankcase, a low-backpressure exhaust,
and revised cam profiles—all of which
increase output from the Enzo’s 651 horsepower to 800 (which converts to 789 SAE
net) at 8500 rpm. Partnering the engine is
an updated version of Ferrari’s paddle-shift
F1 gearbox, with shift time reduced to less
than 100 milliseconds, nearly as quick as
Ferrari’s F1 cars.
A new active aerodynamics system uses
six computer-controlled actuators that,
above 150 mph or so, open to redirect
underbody airflow—lowering the car’s
drag while also increasing downforce by
roughly 40 percent compared with the
Enzo. Other enhancements include
specially developed Brembo compositeceramic brakes and a claimed 220-pound
weight reduction (to just 2700 pounds). The
result? “Although we don’t have an official
acceleration number yet,” says project
leader Giuseppe Petrotta, “the FXX can
108 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

reach 60 mph in about 2.8 seconds—nearly
as quick as a Ferrari F1.” Then Petrotta
grins. “Around Fiorano, it is six seconds
per lap faster than the Enzo.”

PIERO LARDI FERRARI is going
for it. He brakes hard for Mugello’s
180-degree Turn One, bangs off three rifleshot downshifts, then powers through the
apex and up a sharp incline. This is no
parade lap. We fly into the left-hand Luco
turn, and Ferrari is back on the power.
We’re out of control! Quicker than you
can say arrivederci, the back end of the
FXX lurches around, and we’re spinning off
the track and onto the grass. For one long,
sickening, sliding second, the question
hangs silently but thickly in the air: Will we
very publicly, very humiliatingly write off
this brand-new Ferrari ultracar against the
Armco, or won’t we?
We don’t. The FXX twirls to a stop without
breaking anything other than our adrenal
glands. Ferrari turns us around, powers
through the gravel at the edge of the track,
and heads toward the next corner. “Cold
tires,” I offer.
“Sì,” Ferrari nods quietly. “Very cold.” He
accelerates again, but he’s lost the fire; we’re
moving much more circumspectly now.
Which is a shame: Slight over-exuberance
aside, Ferrari clearly knows how to drive
on a racetrack. He’s smooth on the controls
and knows his way into an apex. “My father
would not let me go racing,” he remarks
when I comment on his educated line
around the circuit. “But I am not afraid of
the power. I have never driven an F1, but I
test every new Ferrari road car.”
We stop briefly on the main straight, as

Michael Schumacher and Rubens
Barrichello climb into their F1 cars directly
in front of us. Then we’re all waved off on
another series of laps. I have to pinch
myself: I’m not just watching Schumacher
and Barrichello drive their Formula 1
Ferraris—I’m following them around a
racetrack. It’s a particularly poignant
moment: These are Rubens Barrichello’s
last laps in a Formula 1 Ferrari.
We pull into the pits so the F1 boys can
cut loose. After they scream by on the front
straight, I shake Piero Lardi Ferrari’s hand
and thank him for the drive. “Good,” he
says quietly before being surrounded by a
throng of Ferrari executives and fans.
I take a moment to catch my breath. This
ocean of racing red, these fanatical fans,
those earsplitting F1 torpedoes, this sublime FXX parked next to me, engine off but
still radiating heat and passion and speed.
Call Ferrari an automaker if you wish.
Personally, I think it’s an opera company. ■

{ THE
SHAPE OF }
THINGS
TO COME
Controversial auto designer Chris Bangle
has only just begun his quest to change the world }}
■

words gavin green

}} A WILD-EYED revolutionary destroying one of Europe’s blue-chip luxury
brands? The most influential automotive designer of the early 21st century? Passions run high
whenever BMW’s design chief is the topic of discussion. He might have been born and raised
in the Midwest, but with Bangle there is, it seems, no middle ground.
Love or loathe his work, Bangle’s impact on auto design has been profound. No other
designer, not even legendary GM design chief Harley Earl, has so rapidly become a part of the
industry lexicon. To “bangle” a design is now an auto-industry verb for ruining it. Auto writers
use “Bangle butt” to describe a tail with an extra layer of metal on the trunk (think new Mercedes
S-Class). Bangle, some rivals will remind you, is only one letter away from “bungle.”
Web sites petitioning for Bangle’s dismissal continue to attract support, other designers still
treat him rather as the grands artistes of the Académie des beaux-arts treated the young Manet,
and most auto writers still regard Bangle as the antichrist of car couture. But Bangle BMWs sell.
And some critics are starting to wonder whether maybe, just maybe, this intense 47-year-old,
who once considered becoming a Methodist minister before studying at the renowned Art
Center College of Design in Pasadena, California, might be onto something.
110 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 111

(interview) chris bangle
J Mays, Ford’s global design guru, is no fan, but he admits Bangle
has been significant in reshaping modern cars. Martin Smith—
former GM Europe design chief and now head of design for Ford
of Europe—talks of him as an instigator of the trend toward
“surface entertainment” in cars. Take a look at the complex forms
and creases on the panels of his
Frankfurt show-stopping Iosis concept—
said to be the blueprint for Ford’s future
European design direction—to see why
Smith wholeheartedly buys into that
idea.
“He’s certainly the most talked about
[designer],” says Patrick Le Quement,
design boss of Renault and probably the
world’s most admired car designer. “His
designs have a great deal of presence,
and they’re well proportioned. He’s been
highly influential. My only concern is his
use of concave surfaces: They’re hollow
shapes and lack that tightly muscled look
I feel helps design.”
Before Bangle, premium cars—following the leads of MercedesBenz and more recently Audi—were organic, clean, simple
designs. Modern cars are fussier, busier, multi-angled, more

sharply edged. That’s the Bangle influence. Bangle calls it “visual
energy.” He’s to automotive visual energy what Picasso was to
cubism or Gropius was to Bauhaus.
“A car designer is really a sculptor,” says Bangle. “Cars are the
sculptures of our everyday lives. We at BMW do not build cars as
consumer objects, just to drive from A to
B. We build mobile works of art.” He says
he draws his influences from the world
around him: “From everything. From
airplanes, to boats, to cathedrals…but
we try not to be too influenced by
other cars.”
When Christopher Edward Bangle
was given the top design job at BMW in
1992, it surprised more than a few autoindustry insiders. After graduating from
Art Center in the 1980s, Bangle worked
for GM’s Opel division in Germany and
headed Fiat’s design facility in Turin,
Italy. But he’d only been credited with
one complete car, the curiously angular
Fiat Coupé, when he moved to Munich. No one knew what to
expect.
BMW was then an engineering-dominated company, as German

■■■
“ A car designer is
really a sculptor…cars
are the sculptures of
our everyday lives.
We build mobile
works of art. ”
■■■

bangle influenced...
1. MERCEDES-BENZ S-CLASS

3. AUDI Q7

5. LEXUS LF-SH

Once the epitome of conservative
good taste, the S-Class has now gone
flashy. There’s visual entertainment
galore, but the most BMW-like
feature is the Bangle butt—that extra
layer of steel on top of the trunk.

Audi was once the bastion of antiBangle: simple, pure, classic, organic
forms. But the Q7 sport/utility
vehicle has a busy body—a Bangle
hallmark. The ravenous front air
intakes, including the grille, and slit
eyes, also are BMW influenced.

Toyota’s luxury division is a convert
to Bangle-ism. Both the new GS and
IS sedans have Bangle cues like
strong shoulders, sheer surfaces, and
a high deck. The LF-Sh concept
shows Toyota will keep the faith with
the next generation LS, too.

4. CADILLAC BLS

6. TOYOTA AVALON

GM’s angular and flamboyant Saabbased 3 Series rival has the deep
body flanks of the 5 Series, the
hard-edged high shoulders, and a
noticeable angular hood crease that
blends with the A-pillar. It’s bold and
extroverted: pure Bangle.

The Kentucky-built Toyota is a
conservative thing, as its customers
demand. But this full-size sedan has
unusual curling 5 Series sedan-style
taillights and a Bangle butt to give
some edge to the otherwise cautious
shape.

2. FORD IOSIS CONCEPT
This is Ford of Europe’s new design
direction—though Ford in Europe
changes design direction as regularly
as it changes its management, so
nothing can be certain. The Iosis is
multi-angled, multi-planed, and has
more creases than John Kerry’s face.
It’s Blue Oval Bangle.

1.

3.

5.

2.

4.

6.

112 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

(interview) chris bangle
auto firms invariably were.
Design had an insignificant
voice. Cars were tasteful, elegant,
and similar in style despite size.
Bangle was given license to
change by managers who knew
a bold step was needed—and
change he did. Of BMW’s rich
design DNA, only three styling
genes were preserved: the twinkidney grille, the quad headlamps (although lens shapes
have been revolutionized), and
the Hofmeister kink—the hook in
the side windows at the rear
pillars, named after the BMW
design director who first drew it in 1961, Wilhelm Hofmeister.
The launch of the E65 7 Series in 2001 confirmed the radical
change in design direction hinted at in concept cars like the
muscular Z9 coupe and the oddly asymmetrical X3 coupe.
It was time, insists Bangle, for a
change. “The old 7 Series, the E38, was
an elegant car, an evolution of the classic
BMW look. But it wasn’t penetrating the
luxury market as we desired. It just didn’t
have the presence to be noticed. At the
same time, cars were screaming for
change. They were changing—new
more powerful motors, way more
technology, more speed—they were
fundamentally different cars. Put me in
one more time, and I ain’t gonna fit, they
were almost saying to the designers.
Factor in the changing demographics.
We knew China and Asia as a whole
would be the big growth markets. Our
competitors were dominating in these countries in the luxury
market. So we needed to do something new. Whenever you move
ahead, you leave some people behind.”
Did he not feel the smallest frisson of uncertainty before those
covers came off the E65 7 Series, revealing the high Bangle butt,
those sad, spaniel-eye headlamps, the incomprehensive iDrive
(can’t blame Bangle for that, though), and all those convex and
concave curves and sweeping lights that melded to give Bangle’s
signature flame surfacing? Not for a moment. “We’d done our
homework. We were confident. We were never going to go back to
the old way.”
But has the subsequent criticism—of the 7 Series, the 5 Series,
the Z4 (which brilliant industrial designer and car enthusiast Marc
Newson once described as having been designed with a
machete), the X3, and the 1 Series—hurt? “A lot of criticism came
from reactionary elements who weren’t expecting change,
especially such a pronounced change, and from such a completely
unexpected quarter—BMW. They forgot BMW was once renowned
for its design bravery. I think perhaps we at BMW had forgotten
that, too.
“Yes, the press—or elements of it—were vicious. But the only
thing that bothered me was when it reached my family, and it hurt
them. I have a 17-year-old son, who was 13 at the time, and he was
affected by the criticism. It hurt him. You need to separate the
professional from the private; you need to draw the line. In fact, it
probably brought us closer as a family.”

Although his name is irrevocably linked to them, Bangle takes
little credit for specific Bangle-era vehicles, always citing the name
of the chief designer responsible. For the 2001 7 Series, it was one
of his protégés, Dutchman Adrian van Hooydonk, who has since
been elevated to chief of design for the BMW brand (Bangle
continues as head of design for the entire BMW family, including
Mini, Rolls-Royce, and motorcycles).
Bangle sees his job as “managing the conflict between
corporate pragmatism—the clear need to make money—and
artistic passion. My role is to inspire people, to work as an editor
and a director of the whole thing, to make sure that if there are
issues between ourselves and the board they’re resolved as quickly
as possible. BMW felt it was time to move, they allowed us to
move—we did it together.
“So, yeah, I do feel we’ve kick-started this industry. It had slept
for a while. Now I look around and see other car companies are
waking up and starting to do good.”
Now that the fuss is dying down and sales of his designs are
growing, does Bangle feel vindicated? “You know, my mind is now
somewhere else already. I worry that the industry isn’t looking far
enough forward. We’re closing in rapidly
at the end of the current paradigm in the
evolution of the car, and if this paradigm
lasts beyond 2020, I’ll be amazed. After
that, cars, as we understand them now,
will be different animals.
“We as an industry know change is
happening, but we don’t seem to be able
to deal with it. The design schools—
which are way too conservative—aren’t
researching this; the relationship
between engineering and design is in a
stasis. But, man, we’ve got to go so much
further. We need engineers to be prepared to go up front and lead!”
The key issues, contends Bangle,
include urban congestion, pollution, and that the automobile is
beyond the economic reach of many people, especially in the
developing countries where makers are targeting growth. Cars—
or, more accurately, personal-mobility devices—need to be made
much cheaper. “Automobiles are now like computers in 1952.
We’re a long way from PCs that you go down to Wal-Mart to pick
up. We’re miles from where personal mobility could be if it
achieves the efficiency and lost-cost dynamic we’ve come to
expect from other industries. So come on, guys, let’s roll!” ■

■■■
“ Automobiles are
now like computers
were in 1952. We’re
a long way from PCs
that you go down to
Wal-Mart to pick up. ”
■■■

114 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

IN THE BEGINNING,
there was Eldo versus Mark III and IV, a
recurring battle of personal luxobarges
referred to as “King of the Hill” by Motor
Trend in the 1970s. As the years went by,
Lincoln departed Ford’s Premier
Automotive Group, and General Motors
announced its intention to remake Cadillac
the “standard of the world.” Other
European brands have more sporting
intentions, but none owns the fast German
autobahns more than Mercedes’s torquerich AMG machines, the CLS55 being one
of its newest—and sexiest. Its AMG-built
5.4-liter V-8 mit kompressor is good for
469 horsepower and a pavement-pounding 516 pound-feet of torque that pushes
4307 pounds of steel, aluminum, plastic,
leather, and suede.

✣

yawanwolbblownaway

The king of the hill is dead. Long live the king of the autobahn
■ words todd lassa ■ photographs evan klein

116 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

cadillac sts-v vs. mercedes cls55 amg (head to head)

â&#x153;Ł

BUT CADILLAC is fighting
back with its own 469 horses,
complements of its new GM Performance
Division-engineered Northstar V-8 SC, in
one of its most powerful American
production cars ever. The blown 4.4-liter
makes 439 pound-feet at 3800 rpm in an
upright, full four-door sedan.
Before you reach for a pen or
Blackberry, know we tried to get an E55
AMG to rub against the Caddy, as it more
resembles the STS-v in terms of roofline
and price. But Mercedes couldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t come
up with one during our test window and
offered this instead. The mechanicals are
the same; simply adjust the base MSRP
downward by about five grand for the
E55.

blownawayyawanwolb
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 117

(head to head) cadillac sts-v vs. mercedes cls55 amg

Seventy mph is legal on most Michigan
Interstates, and it’s a quick shot through
Northern Indiana and Chicago to
Milwaukee, although the last two will
seriously slow you down. Milwaukee has a
large German-American population, a
history of brewing beer, and a cool, avantgarde architecture art museum for
photography. So we took I-94.
The flog began at a German-sounding
American course, the “Lutzring” (a track at
GM’s Proving Grounds) for a test of each
car’s handling abilities. At this venue,

neither exhibits super quick or
communicative steering, but both handle
more like sport sedans than full-size luxury
cars. On public roads, the CLS55’s heavy
steering and wide AMG tires become a
deficit at low speeds. At parking-lot pace, it
feels like non-assisted steering. On the
track, the Mercedes’s five-speed automatic
gets confused, not always knowing whether
to downshift or upshift when you toe in and
back out of the throttle.
The Caddy features the first application
of GM’s smooth new six-speed automatic,

*As measured by Sneezy, GM’s sound-measuring mannequin (developed in Aachen,
Germany) with a human-shaped head to perceive noise as humans do.

118 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

which serves the STS-v well at the Lutzring,
whether you tap the gearshift up and down
or let its sport mode pick the right gear,
usually second or third here. The STS-v is
biased toward understeer, while the Cad’s
attitude is neutral around the ’ring. It
doesn’t rotate until it’s too late and then
oversteer whips the tail. The Benz lets you
steer with the throttle, progressively
wagging its tail out.
Things change when reengaging
traction and stability controls and taking to
public roads. Cadillac’s StabiliTrak will
fishtail the STS-v out of power-on turns,
while the Benz’s electronic stability
program gets jiggy on the throttle and ABS,
holding momentum on a tighter leash.
Once grip reestablishes itself, the CLS55
becomes a runaway freight train, able to
thrust itself past mere mortal V-8s as if they
were stuck in neutral.
Cadillac’s powerhouse is nearly as
impressive, but the torque deficit is
obvious through the seat of your pants.
After hitting 105.7 mph in the quarter
mile, the Caddy struggles to reach 140
mph on our track, while the Merc does
114.5 mph and continues on to 140 as if
it’s a day in the park. You won’t legally,
sanely drive that fast, but Cadillac will sell
the STS-v in Europe in minute numbers
(North American volume will be about
2000 per year) as an image builder. On
the real autobahn, quick spurts to 250 kph
(about 140 mph) aren’t uncommon, so this
matters. Braking and lateral grip figures

This pair is more alike than you think,
right down to the horsepower rating
reveal the cars to be equally matched.
Both have fine, stitched-leather instrument
panels. GMPD contracted Drexel Meyer,
which also does Maybach’s leather, to
handle the leather and suede hides on the
STS-v’s dash, seats, and door panels. And it
has heated rear seats, while the Benz has
them only up front. But the Cadillac driver
seat isn’t as comfortable for long hauls,
especially compared with the Mercedes’s

✣

well-bolstered perforated leather and
suede front seats. The v treatment is added
to an STS interior, but falls short of its
luxury intentions. This (admittedly good)
patch job can’t match an interior designed
richly from the carpeting up, especially
now that Mercedes is rebounding on
interior quality.
Among the CLS55’s many interior tricks
is its dynamic driver’s seat, in which the

bolsters hold you in turns at the press of a
button. Turn left, and the right bolster
pumps up, and vice versa. It seems overwrought when gently changing lanes, but
it’s good on tight turns.
Standard nav systems, monthly-fee
satellite radio, and cruise control help eat
up a 785-mile round-trip. Neither navigation
system is easy to use, sometimes
providing incorrect information (note to

supercharging the northstar

✣

BEHOLD CADILLAC’S first production supercharged
engine. Its official SAE-certified horsepower rating of 469 is the
highest for any factory Cadillac, including all the jumbo-block
SAE-gross-rated behemoths of the 1960s and early 1970s. Making
power is all about getting air into cylinders. This can be done the
Corvette Z06 way, using great big lungs, or by
forcing air in with a blower. Cadillac reckoned the
latter approach had a better chance of
delivering the refinement and smooth
idle demanded of a $77,090 car.
Air enters through an 80mm throttle
body, flows around back of the engine
and into the valley, where it’s sucked up
5
into the largest production Roots blower going. Spinning at 2.1 times crank
6
speed, the air is pressurized to 12 psi before
flowing up through a Laminova intercooler
(water runs through tubes lined with closely
spaced fins). The cooling fins drop pressure to 10 psi and
quell the blower pulses. Air then U-turns and flows straight
down into the intake valves to meet its octane-fueled destiny.
Intake and exhaust valve timing are variable. Spent exhaust
gases exit via extrude-honed ports, through cast manifolds and
out through oversize catalysts and twin 2.5-inch sewer pipes.
The 469 horses arrive at 6400 rpm, but at least 395 of the

Cadillac: Milwaukee has more than four
hotels). And Cadillac’s GM cruise control
doesn’t have a cancel switch. Mercedes’s
nav system (which doesn’t have a
“lawyer” screen you must acknowledge
before using it) is better, but only by virtue
of not being as confusing or confused as
the Cadillac’s. Mercedes’s Sirius sat radio
and Cadillac’s XM have good selections of
clear, digital sound.
For buyers of either car, the quality of
the leather and the nav systems will go far
in determining which automaker gets the
monthly payment. By this standard, the
Mercedes CLS55 would nab the old “King
of the Hill” title. V-Series upgrades make
the Cadillac a contender in this field, but
they’re like a baked-on layer of quality
material, while the Benz’s level of quality is
deep fried to the bone.
To the issue of which owns the autobahn,
American or otherwise, the STS-v does
such an honest job that one no longer
needs to ask whether Cadillac deserves to
play in this universe. The STS-v appears
the better buy, but with a major caveat.
Cadillac is new to this price territory: Can
it play at $75K plus, and is it likely to hold
its value as well as BMW and MercedesBenz models do? If not, then its up-front
price advantage will dwindle.
Which is king of the autobahn? The
CLS55’s
outstanding
performance,
superb high-speed stability, and
impressive cabin make the difference,
even for a few dollars more. That
Cadillac’s entry is a credible large luxury/
performance sport sedan makes it a
winner in its own right. Well done, but the
Mercedes still gets the crown. ■

IS A DARING
EXPERIMENT
THAT RESULTS
IN A PREMIUM VEHICLE
THAT COULD CHANGE
THE WAY
PEOPLE EXAMINE
THEIR NEEDS

THIS IS A CASE

of the Smiths
versus the Joneses. For the Joneses, the
ideal vehicle carries a ton of groceries,
hauls friends to the nearest mountain-bike
trail, totes the kid and five of his teammates
to weekly practice, and perhaps ushers the
boss and his wife to dinner and a show. The
Joneses need a modern minivan, the most
reasoned, well-conceived, and best allaround family vehicle on the planet.
The Smiths, on the other hand, are far
more demanding—and better financed.
They want the same convenience, plus the
all-weather flexibility and confidence of allwheel drive as well as a high-tech V-8 with
over 300 horsepower nestled behind a
grille emblem that says, “I can afford the
best.” A minivan, despite its rationale, just
won’t do. The Smiths can afford to drive past
the minivan lot and into a premium-marque
showroom. In fact, for the price of just one of
the following V-8 crossovers, the Smiths
could afford two minivans.
Case in point: Our Cadillac SRX V8 AWD
starts at just under $50,000. The SRX’s
architecture is based on the CTS sedan.
The glass and sheetmetal on the rear
converts it into a large wagon; the third-row
seats, and AWD system add about 850
pounds. It takes roughly a minute (even with
practice) to raise or lower the poweroperated acrobatic seatbacks once all the
preordained criteria are met. In fact, nifty as
it sounds, the third-row seating is hardly
suitable for adults and requires a nimble
preteen to even land a butt back there.
Cadillac must have felt it needed poweroperated rear seats, but the aggravation
MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 133

(comparison)
CADILLAC SRX V8 AWD

factor hardly seems worth the effort or
added $1100 cost (including rear air). The
SRX doesn’t offer curtain airbags in the
third row, as do the Mercedes or Volvo.
Couple this with the smallest cargo
dimensions of the group, and the SRX feels
compromised as a viable crossover/sport
tourer/thingy for seven adults.
Unfettered by its defeatable electronic
safety nannies, however, the SRX is the most
nimble of our contenders, posting the best
slalom and skidpad figures. Its ride quality,
even without the aid of optional magnetic
ride control, led the field by a comfortable
and quiet margin. Conversely, the vehicle
with the most powerful V-8 in the group at
320 horsepower (also with the best weightto-power ratio), finished last in acceleration.
Equipped as our tester was, the SRX’s total
134 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

came to $56,590. That’s a bunch of money
to feel inconvenienced by the seating and
shortchanged by the cargo and accelerative
aspects. Think of the SRX as a comfortable,
tall wagon with a third-row seat added as an
afterthought.
Also based, if somewhat loosely, on a
sedan, the Volvo XC90 gets stretched three
ways, adds an all-wheel-drive system, a
third row of seats, and hosts an engine not
currently available in any other Volvo.
Co-developed with Yamaha, this unusual
60-degree V-8 is mounted transversely,
unlike the others’ 90-degree front/back V-8s.
The Volvo V-8 was engineered to be a
light, compact, powerful yet fuel-efficient
engine, and it does the job as advertised.
It’s a gem of a motor. At only 4.4 liters, the
Volvo V-8 is the smallest here, yet holds its

(comparison)
MERCEDES-BENZ R500

own with the American and German mills,
earning second-quickest honors. It sounds
good doing it, too, though its sometimes
befuddled six-speed automatic hunted for
gears. The suspension motions are heavyduty SUV in nature, but this makes sense
when you realize this is the only one, with
28- and 20-degree approach/departure
angles, that can actually go off-road.
Where the Volvo outshines the SRX is in
interior design and engineering. That the
third-row received as much attention as the
second-row seating is obvious. Stowing or
assembling the third row takes 10 to 15
seconds, without the “convenience” of
electric motors. Further, headrests always
remain attached and flip up or down as
needed. While climbing into the rearmost
seats is nearly as difficult as in the Cadillac,
136 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

the reward is an adult-size perch replete
with side-curtain airbags.
If the Smiths were looking for a true
seven-passenger sport/utility, the Volvo
doesn’t surrender running shoe comfort at
the expense of hiking boot capability. It’s a
solid choice for those who’d prefer the look
of an SUV, with the flexibility of a minivan
and the safety of a Volvo. Coming in at the
lowest base- and as-tested price doesn’t
hurt, either—a concern for many.
On the test track, the Mercedes-Benz
R500 took first place in acceleration and
narrowly missed (by two feet from 60 mph)
in braking, a feat unexpected from a 5200pound vehicle. No doubt aided by its multimode electronic seven-speed automatic,
which seems to have the correct ratio for
every occasion, it’ll even skip over gears if

(comparison)
VOLVO XC90 V8

Left: In the second row, Volvo offers
the industry’s only sliding, certified
child booster seat.
conditions dictate an urgent downshift.
Despite a stability system that can’t be fully
defeated, the R500 still managed to hold the
skidpad with nearly the same tenacity as
the less electronically restrained SRX. In
138 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

fact, the R500 nipped out the others in our
figure-eight test, transitioning more adeptly
between acceleration, braking, and
cornering.
Our staff is split on the efficacy of the
R500’s optional Airmatic suspension. Some
appreciate the adjustability between
“sport” and “comfort,” while others think it
represents a bandage to an underengineered suspension system. We have
driven examples with and without it, but it’s
still ideal to have the option. The MercedesBenz interior accommodations trump all in
this test. It has the expected elegance and
options (DVD player, rear air, giant sunroof),
plus the inherent configurability of this new
platform. It boasts honest-to-six-foot-goodness
seating for six adults that’s as accessible as
it is spacious. The cargo cavern in the

(comparison)

0.1

R-Class is by far the most useful: Even with
all rows of seating occupied, it still has over
15 cubic feet of room behind the third row.
Downside? Price—maybe even for a
more affluent shopper. At over $56,000 for
the base R500, that’s still a lot of money for
a family that watches HBO on a big-screen
plasma TV. Regardless, a barebones R500
would’ve beaten our loaded SRX for reasons
that have nothing to do with its optional
equipment. Would the R500 have been
$6000 better than the $49,000 Volvo? Yes,
because the package itself is farther reaching
and more accommodating. Our R500 test
model had nearly every available option
and totaled almost $71,000, but the V-6 R350
starts at $48,775.
The R500 is neither compromised by the
limitations of a sedan platform nor
stigmatized by the trappings of a minivan.
What it is can be defined by what it does—
and that’s just about everything. Not only
has Mercedes nailed the functional side of
this equation, it’s also got the chic look the
Smiths are after, and the hardware to make
it all work well. The Mercedes-Benz R500,
whatever you want to call it, is the winner
among this crowd. ■

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 1ST PLACE
MERCEDES-BENZ R500

0.2

Mercedes throws definitions
out the window and builds the
right vehicle for those with a
fat income. It’s a daring
experiment that results in a
premium vehicle that could
change the way people
examine their needs.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 2ND PLACE
VOLVO XC90 V8
Sticking to the program, Volvo
has done a terrific job of
making a seven-passenger
SUV work in more ways than
many others have thus far.
If you go off-road, your family
can do so safely and in
comfort. The XC90 also offers
the best value message among
this trio.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 3RD PLACE
CADILLAC SRX V8 AWD

0.3
140 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

Cadillac takes the wagon theme
to new heights of premium
performance but comes up
short for seven passengers.
Skip the third-row option.

Tested separately, this R500 is equipped differently from the one on page 70.

MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 141

(newcomers) ■ jaguar super v8 portfolio

top floor,
please

THE

PENTHOUSE
SUITE OF JAGUAR

SEDANS

THE PREMIUM
luxury-car buyer is a lucky
one, with so many posh and
polished models fighting for
their annual bonus. For carmakers, though, it’s tough turf:
BMW has freshened the 7
Series to solid reviews, the
Audi A8 is a topline player,
and the soon-to-be-updated
Lexus LS 430 remains a strong
seller. Add to this an all-new
version of this segment’s flagship, the all-important
Mercedes-Benz S-Class. Even
though Jaguar’s XJ lineup is
entering just its third model
year, it can’t dawdle on the
existing, and hasn’t. The 2006

XJ roster has been updated,
and capped with a ne plus ultra
model called the Portfolio.
You still can choose between
short- and long-wheelbase platforms, the latter about five inches
longer between the wheels,
with all that space ending up in
the rear-passenger space.
Each available in naturally
aspirated (now 300 horsepower) and supercharged (400
horse, up from 390) V-8 powertrains. All get new chrome mesh
front grilles, revised wheel
designs, improved braking,
Bluetooth and optional Sirius
radio capability, upgraded auto
systems, and numerous
enhancements aimed at
making the big Jags quieter.
The Super V8 Portfolio goes
it all a step better. Its most
unique design element is the

146 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

aluminum power vents at the
trailing edge of the front fenders.
The SV8P gets the full
performance powertrain/
suspension/brake package,
plus larger tailpipes and a
special 20-inch wheel using
the same logo Jag used on its
race cars in the 1950s—way
cool. Cabin trim goes way up,
in the form of a fixed rear
center console and adjustable
rear seats, super soft
“Conker” leather, suedefabric headliner, satin-finished
American black walnut
veneers, and, yes, those cute
fold-down picnic tables. The
Portfolio comes in long-wheelbase form only.
Besides all the tactile benefits
served up by the Portfolio, the
driving experience is sublime.
The blown V-8/ZF six-speed
combo has always been a
happy one, and while not
packing the punch or cachet
of Mercedes and BMW V-12s,
it leaves little else to be
desired. Since the chassis is
lighter than its steel-bodied
rivals, the performance deficit
isn’t as large as you may think.
The revised braking package
yields better feel and more
modulation. Much noticed is
the sound-deadening benefit
courtesy of the new dash
insulator and tunnel, hood, and
door liners, and revised glass.
This car is quiet, exhibiting far

less road rumble and wind
noise than the previous XJ. Jags
are meant to perform, yes, but
with more suppleness than the
edgier German brands. By the
way, you’re still stuck with the
outmoded J-gate shifter
quadrant, but most buyers in
this class probably select Drive
and forget about it anyway.
Simply put, the Super V8
Portfolio is the finest Jaguar
sedan ever offered. At
$115,595, it should be, but it’s
gentleman’s-club comfortable,
well equipped, and gorgeous.
Just 145 will be sold in the U.S.,
making it something special
for those whose tastes don’t
favor a German hyper-luxury
sedan.
■ matt

Alan Greenspan,
inflation is something to be
met with resistance. But for
Toyota’s redesigned thirdgeneration RAV4—now
available for the first time with
a V-6 engine—inflation may be
just the ticket.
While SUV buyers are
shedding mega-’utes at the
horror of $120 refuelings, the
RAV4’s expanded new size
—a whopping 14 inches in
length—converts what’s been
a compact SUV into a flexible
alternative. With the driver
seat positioned for this
scribe’s six-foot one-inch
frame, second-row knee room

is still a leg-crossing 3.5 inches.
Surprising too are the split
rear seats that can be slid
approximately 4.5 inches
forward to expand rear cargo
room or tilted back 25
degrees. Optionally, there’s
also a new hypercompact foldin-the floor third-row seat that’s
basically a kid department,
though roomier than a few
we’ve recently visited. Steeply
inclined rear shocks are
reason enough for the extra
rear interior volume, though it
doesn’t detract from rearwheel travel in mild offroading.
The RAV’s greater size and
V-6 caused murmurs that it
might be creeping too far into
the Highlander’s market nest.
Perhaps, but it takes just one
green light to differentiate them.

Where the 230-horse V-6
Highlander is powered by the
Camry’s 3.3-liter mill, the
RAV4’s thumping 269-horsepower, 3.5-liter six is snitched
from the Avalon’s engine
cradle—dual variable
camshafts and all. The result is
the giddy acceleration (Toyota
claims sub-seven seconds to
60 mph) only vehicles with
inappropriate quantities of
power can provide. Coupled
to its standard five-speed auto
trans, expect mileage of about
20 city/28 highway for frontdrive versions, one fewer highway mpg for the 4x4.
The base 2.4-liter fourbanger has been upgraded to
166 horsepower and splined
to a four-speed automatic. It
provides a steady-as-she-goes
tow-rope ride to cruising
speeds while delivering 24/31
mpg for the 4x2 version, 23/29
cited for the four-wheel drivers.
Three levels of trim are
available, regardless of
engine—Base, Sport, or
Limited. The Sport offers a
firmer suspension (a mite too
stiff-legged for comfortable
off-roading), wider 235/55R18
tires replacing the base
215/70R16s (four-cylinder
engine) or 225/65R17s (V-6),
smoked-looking headlamp
bezels, and a blackout grille
and roof rails. The Limited
goes the premium-look route

with chrome grille, leather
interior details, power seats,
and comfortable-riding
225/65R17 tires. Options
include a tow package that can
haul 3500 pounds with the V-6.
The RAV4 is nimbler than
ever, due to the steering rack’s
direct mounting to the frame,
and its reflexes are especially
striking in the nimble Sport
version, where the RAV4 feels
like a sports car in hiking
boots. Combined with a firm
brake pedal and the sledgehammer V-6, the vehicle that
originated the small, carbased SUV segment in this
country might represent an
inflation approved even by a
worrywart like Greenspan.
■ kim

excitable boy
GM’S self-declared
Excitement Division has been
trying to find its pulse lately.
Although the Firebird is gone
and the Northstar-powered
Bonneville GXP tanked, the
new V-8-fortified Grand Prix is
interesting, and the 400-horse
GTO remains a Motor Trend
favorite. For 2006, the G6 has
begat a coupe, and it retains
the sedan’s 112.3-inch wheel-

base in the name of morethan-occasional rear-seat
head and legroom.
The G6 is available with the
workaday 201-horse, 3.5-liter
V-6 or a beefier 3.9-liter
version good for 240 horsepower in GTP trim. The latter
includes handsome 18-inch
rolling stock, sportier
suspension tuning, standard
StabiliTrak, and the choice of

echo eraser
YOU’D think replacing
the Echo would be one of the
easier roles a new model
could be assigned. When it
was introduced in 2000, the
Toyota’s Roger Rabbit styling
pigeonholed it the class clown
of the model year, and no
amount of affordability could
unspill the milk. But the two
Yaris models replacing it—a
chic three-door liftback and a
trendy sedan—still have a
tough mission, even at a sub-

$13,000 base price. And that’s
to demonstrate that the
Japanese automotive powerhouse can compete with
South Korea (and soon China)
in building blue-light-special
entry-level vehicles.
Inside, both cars are
unusually spacious for their
diminutive scale and continue
the Echo and Prius’s tradition
of the gauge cluster in the
middle of the dash. Its
symmetrical design certainly

148 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

a boring four-speed automatic
or a more involving six-speed
manual. Hydraulic power
steering replaces the numbish
electric steering on standard
G6s.
It all adds up to an attractive,
pleasantly sporty coupe. If you
didn’t know this engine’s an
overhead valver, you’d think
it’s an overhead cammer: It’s
smooth, revs nicely, and has a
wide powerband and a sweet
exhaust note. Its 6.2-second
0-to-60 time isn’t the stuff of
legend, but enough to have
fun. The six-speed shifter is
notchy, but better than on
many front drivers. This
steering is much—no, way—
improved over the electric
unit, with adequate feel and
virtually no torque steer.
There’s plenty of grip (0.83 g
on our skidpad), making the
GTP an entertaining handler, if
not an all-out road racer. And
this coupe easily seats four
people in comfort.

smells like cost saving, but
Toyota claims it creates a
more spacious feeling as
well as better control of the
crush zone ahead of the
driver.
Under the Yaris’s tiny hood
is a diminutive DOHC
1.5-liter four-cylinder engine
with variable valve timing on
the intake cam, producing
106 horsepower at 6000
rpm. Backing it is either a
four-speed automatic or an
easy-shifting five-speed
manual; in your hands is
electrically boosted steering
that reduces fuel consumption
by a sell-your-mother-for two
percent. Mileage for both
models is preliminarily
pegged at 34 city/40 mpg
highway for manual
transmission cars and 34/39
for automatics. Liftback and
sedan are available in base
CE and better-trimmed LE
grades, while the latter adds
a superficial S version (on
all, ABS is unfortunately
optional).

The G6 GTP is an okay
piece, has high equipment
levels, and feels like a fair
amount of car for the money.
One question nags, however:
Would you buy this over a
300-horse, V-8-powered, reardrive Mustang GT for the
same money ($27,570 as
tested)? Didn’t think so.
■ matt

2005
Porsche 911 Carrera S
A superb machine that defies logic and reason
IF YOU have to ask why we’d
add a new Porsche 911 to our
long-term fleet, you’re reading
the wrong magazine. The 911 is
a true automotive icon, a car
that for millions of enthusiasts
around the word defines the
very essence of Porsche.

Improving an icon isn’t easy.
Common sense tells you hanging
an engine out behind the rear
axle will screw up the chassis
balance that’s the hallmark of a
great sports car. Yet when
Porsche went back to the
drawing board to reinvent the

911 with the 996 variant, almost
40 years of history and tradition
dictated that’s exactly what it
had to do. Even so, with its
water-cooled flat six,“fried egg”
headlights, and long overhangs
front and rear, the 996 was
different enough to bother the

True Believers. To them, the car
lacked the tautness and drama
of the 993, the last—and
arguably greatest—of the aircooled 911s.
The 997 is designed to win
over the True Believers. Back are
the hourglass curves, signature

you forget you’re driving a fourdoor family hauler built around
front-drive architecture.The
adaptive headlight system
malfunctioned one evening, but
the nav screen allowed us access
to a function that verbally
described how to fix the problem.
The car’s smarter than the dealer,
who reported a powerless powerpoint with a sticking lid as
“normal.” We replaced a blown
fuse ourselves; the lid still sticks.

2005 BMW X3 2.5i

stuff fitted, our worn-from-dayone wiper blades were
replaced. It’s the little things
that make you smile.

OUR FLEET

2005 ACURA RL
Total Mileage 7969

THE RL’S outward imagery is
quick, thrusting, BMW-sporty.
But with comfy seats, soft-ish
ride, and subdued V-6, it feels
more like a cruiser. An old man’s
car, says one editor’s wife. Ouch.
But we like the seamless SHAWD system for almost making

THE X3’S moonroof is large
enough for front and rear-seat
passengers to enjoy, but the
opposite is true in terms of
interior storage space. The only
decent-size thingy bin is the
deep cupholder in the center
console. What’s the point of
having a lifestyle vehicle when
you can’t carry your life around
with you? Still, the dealer’s
looking after us. We ordered our
X3 with the Sirius Satellite Radio,
but the parts weren’t available
when it was built. While in the
dealer’s shop to have the Sirius

“Porsche never ceases to amaze me with each new Carrera. Just when you think it’s got it
perfect, the next one blows off your lederhosen.” ■ Chris Walton

round headlamp design, and a
RWD-version of the higher-performance S model. Porsche
gave the Carrera better balance
and handling, new rolling stock,
and an upgrade in the power
department—even the shifter is
new and, yes, improved. To us, a
new 911 Carrera S hit all the
right emotional hot buttons,
while bringing worthwhile
technical improvements to the
party. Of course, we had to have
one.

We ordered our S in an
optional hue called Atlas Grey
Metallic with matching full
leather seats. Gray, charcoal, and
anthracite are the new black,
and ours looks like liquid metal.
To the base price of $79,895 we
added over $10K in options,
including the paint ($825) and
seat-material upgrade ($3315)
as well as matching floormats
($115), leather steering wheel
($490), the Sport Chrono
package ($920), Sport Exhaust

(pricey at $2400, but the sound
is amazing), and Bose sound
system ($1390) with remote sixdisc changer ($650).
Lust never comes cheap.
We had to get past the 2000mile recommended break-in
procedure, which was torture
and tickle. We could tickle the
throttle, but only below 4000
rpm. That was the torture. We
got through it, for in the 911,
even the most mundane drive
is an event. For a start, the

illuminated once. The shop foreman found a stored code for an
oil-pressure-sensor circuit fault
over 100 starts ago. But when
he checked the oil-pressure
circuit operation, he found no
abnormal conditions. Ghosts in
the machine? No, if the
condition that logged the code
ain’t there when your car’s in for
service, they just can’t diagnose
the fault.

2005 INFINITI M45

Total mileage

5195

Average test mpg

16.5 mpg

Problem areas

None

steering talks to you like no
other car’s; the leatherbound
wheel squirming in your hands,
keeping up a brisk dialogue
between you and the road
that’s as informative as if you
were brushing your fingertips
across the asphalt. Then there’s
the electric throttle response,
rifle-bolt shift action, and
unquenchable brakes. This has
the makings of a beautiful
relationship. ■

BRIAN VANCE/CHEYNE WALLS/EVAN WOLLENBERG

OUR FLEET

2005 CHRYSLER 300C
HEMI
Total mileage 14,686

SHADES of “The Twilight
Zone”: Replacement of the
300C’s cabin pollen filter is listed
as part of the 12,000-mile
service; it turns out our car
wasn’t equipped with this
option. We also asked about a
“check engine” light that

WHAT’S that beeping noise?
Time check on the radio? Low
oil-pressure warning? No, it’s just
the M45 telling you to stay in
your lane on the freeway. Now,
we do a lot of freeway miles
every day here in La-la-land, and
we think we’ve got this lane
thing figured all by ourselves.

We don’t need the damn car
beeping at us every time we
happen to put a wheel over a
white line without the turnsignal flashing. It’s like having
an electronic mother-in-law on
board. Fortunately, there’s a
switch that turns the lanedeparture warning system off.
Now, take my mother-in-law.
Please.
■ Average fuel econ 19 mpg
■ Problem areas Dead battery
(twice)
■ Maintenance cost $0
■ Normal wear cost $0
For vehicle specs, go to motortrend.com

MOTOR TREND.COM JANUARY 2006 153

BRIAN VANCE

(long-term test) verdict

2004
Toyota Prius
It’s first gallon of fuel cost $1.80. No wonder they’re popular
WOULDN’T YOU know it? Shortly
after our millennium silver Prius was mothballed from the MT long-term fleet and
mailed back to Toyota, the fuel-sipping
lozenge became eligible for California’s carpool lanes, sans passengers. For the second
time, the Prius is the envy of steaming
commuters. First was its hummingbirdappetite for petroleum—and now there’s an
exemption to prowl our gridlock’s car-pool
short cuts without passengers. Would our
50-mile commuters love to see old VIN
number JTDKB20U040009448 back in MT’s
stable?
Yet what originally earned this ultimate
case of vehicular anorexia entry into our
long-term pool wasn’t just its attractive
habit of giving gas stations the finger. It was
the car’s breathtaking technology: a
perhaps once-in-a-generation leap in
powertrain thinking that earned it Motor
Trend’s 2004 Car of the Year trophy—as well
as significant questions about how well all
this underhood razzmatazz was going to
hold up.
While the Toyota’s Hybrid Synergy Drive
hardware has been scrutinized everywhere
from these pages to volumes of SAE
technical papers, more recently its software
has drawn press coverage due to the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration receipt of some 68
156 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

complaints of Priuses mysteriously losing
power and gliding into a limp-home mode.
Consequently, some 75,000 Priuses have
been recalled for software fixes, though
fortunately ours was never afflicted with
the malady.
In fact, the only real glitch our Prius
suffered was a schizophrenic touch screen
whose press locations grew misindexed
with their functions, causing all manner of
confusion. For a while, the dealer was
confused, too, and it was a reader who
offered the diagnostic trick that helped
everyone figure it out. Charge? $22.50.
Annoyance? Priceless. A review of the

service log up to the 20,000-mile point
included only one other anomaly, a rattling
speaker cover and another buried in the
dash. All in all, our total service outlay was a
meager $283.47, nothing out of the
ordinary for a well-built conventional car
and simply remarkable for a device as
diabolically complicated as this. Wear and
tear were about what you’d expect, though
the lightweight dash’s delicate surfacing
materials seemed a tad more susceptible to
scuffs and scratches than usual.
It’s interesting to flip through a long-term
vehicle’s notebook. Usually, a driver tends to
be positive during a car’s honeymoon,
giving the car the benefit of the doubt. But,
like any relationship, the atmosphere can
get chilly over time. Not so the Prius.
On one hand,“There are items in the
Prius we’d be less forgiving of if it weren’t so
green. The steering is roadus disconnectus,
totally numb, and the brakes are nonlinear
when stopping transitions between regenerative and mechanical braking. The CVT’s
rpm-steady technique gives an uneasy feeling of driving a manual-transmission car
with a slipping clutch.” On the other,“The
Prius appeals to my inner geek; it’s mentally
involving as you drive, like following a wellplayed chess match.”
This might explain why our mileage,
accrued over 22,278 miles, tabulated an

verdict (long-term test)

2004 Toyota Prius
POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS
Drivetrain layout

Front engine, FWD

Engine type

I-4, alum block & head/
permanent magnet

Valvetrain

DOHC, 4 valves/cyl

Displacement

91.4 cu in/1497 cc

Compression ratio

13.0:1

Engine power (SAE net)

76 hp @ 5000 rpm

Motor power

67 hp @ 1200 rpm

Combined power

110 hp

BRIAN VANCE

Engine torque (SAE net) 82 lb-ft @ 4200 rpm

underwhelming 41.6 mpg. No surprise that
it’s well south of the EPA’s loopy 60-mpg
city/55-mpg highway figures (what car ever
achieves them?), but even when treading
delicately on the throttle, we rarely
touched 47 mpg. Are all Priuses soldered
together the same? An interesting source
of comparison data is available at
fueleconomy.gov where 85 presumably
less manic drivers have posted an average
of 47.9 mpg. Or the Department of Energy,
where two examples covered 102,000
miles averaging 44.4 mpg. Another
voluntary data-submission Web site, greenhybrid.com, reports a mean of 48.4 mpg.
But even if we were to average all this
together—45.6 mpg—is the Prius cost
premium worth it?
It’s a reasonable guesstimate to say the
Prius’s hybrid technology adds about $4000
to the car’s tab (Toyota profit margin is
beyond our purview) in order to reduce
fuel consumption by roughly 30 percent.
The car’s current $2000 tax deduction (to
be replaced by an undetermined tax credit
on December 31, 2005) helps fills the
economic hole, but even at our local $2.75per-gallon gasoline prices, you’d have to see
approximately 135,000 miles on the
odometer to pay-down the sticker price

difference. A competent accountant would
tell you to avoid the Prius.
But he’d veto a Porsche, too. Any vehicle
offering more than minimum transportation
is betting you’ll spend more for the allure of
higher social status, greater driving
pleasure, or even more irresistible sex
appeal than you already possess (if that’s
possible). Some of the Prius’s attraction is
timeworn: The original VW Beetle was gas
stingy, too. But its appeal is something
never seen before, an automotive choice
that affects global issues. Consider, for
instance, that during our long-term Prius’s
22,000-mile stint, it conserved 225 gallons
of gas relative to what a Corolla automatic
would’ve burned—over two tons of CO2
not spewed into the atmosphere. Or
consider that $80 from the $619 we saved
at the pump didn’t get deposited into
Middle Eastern bank accounts, including
$16 not contributed to the nuclearambitious government of Iran.
So here’s the question again: Is the Prius
premium worth it? The hybrid choice can
be as complex as your social and environmental thinking cares to take it. But all we
simple auto scribes can state for certain is
that our example, at least, was fascinating to
live with—and unexpectedly reliable. ■

The interior is 1970s/1980s sci-fi. The
steering wheel is a marvel of redundancy.
You can avoid the center monitor/touch
screen and still access most functions.
■ Thomas Voehringer
Rolling into the driveway late at night with
only the electric motor running prevents
disturbance of the family dog—stealthy.
■ Brian Vance
The car’s nose reminds me of a duck-billed
platypus, but the rear is cool, as is the profile.
■ Matt Stone

158 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

The Prius gives you the feeling you’re
doing the right thing (kinda like watching
an environmental program on PBS) without those annoying telethons asking for
your contribution. Simply add gas from
time to time, and you’re doing your thing
to save the planet.
■ Cam Benty
No eco-weeniemobile this, it’s easy to get
the drop on most cars and stray in front
of, let alone keep up with, traffic.
■ Ron Sessions

FORTY YEARS AGO, Oldsmobile’s
revolutionary Toronado took honors as
MT’s Car of the Year. It was a popular car
and a hot seller then and was already
considered a classic by the time the body
was restyled for 1971. Our COTY coverage showed cutaways, photos of clays,
and other early Toro design studies—
even shots of a test car running out of
gas. Good
thing they
weren’t on
the Mobile
Economy Run.
Also featured:
the rise and
fall of the
boattail
speedster
trend.

High Gas Prices a Bummer?
Perhaps this
decades-old idea
is ready
for a comeback
172 JANUARY 2006 MOTOR TREND.COM

FROM 1936 through 1967, Mobil Oil held
a fuel-efficiency rally, called the Mobile
Economy Run. It was largely a publicity tool, but
one not without merit. It began as a one-day
event covering a route from Los Angeles to
Yosemite and ultimately became a week-long
cross-country trek. At first, the Run was for
American cars only, but a separate Run was later
created for foreign brands. This photo, taken at

the finish line of the 1965 Run at Times Square
in Manhattan, gives a sense of the ceremony
that accompanied participation. The 49 entrants
achieved a combined average of 20.3472 mpg
over the 3266-mile route, the longest up to that
time. We bet that mileage number could be
doubled today, but shudder at the cost of
blocking off Time Square for the reception—not
to mention hiring all those bagpipers. ■